AMERICAN 
LABOR  UNIONS 


MAROT 


if 


If      If  It!  !   }! 


THE  LIBRARY 

OF 

THE  UNIVERSITY 

OF  CALIFORNIA 

LOS  ANGELES 


AMERICAN 
LABOR  UNIONS 


BY  A  MEMBER 


HELEN    MAROT 

Member  of  Local  12646  A.  F.  of  L.  ;  Executive  Secretary  of  the  Women's 

Trade  Union  League  of  New  York  1905-1913;  Author  of  "The 

Handbook  of  Labor  Literature" 


NEW  YORK 

HENRY   HOLT   AND    COMPANY 

1914 


Copyright,  1914, 

BY 

HENRY  HOLT  AND  COMPANY 


Published  August,  1914 


THE    QUINN    A    BODE*    CO.    PRESS 
RAMWAY,    M.    J. 


tost.  Indus, 
Set, 

HD 


(pSO% 

yC*p. 


2, 

PREFACE 

For  several  years  economists,  social  workers,  and 
magazine  writers  have  done  their  part  to  bring  the 
labor  problem,  in  many  of  its  aspects,  before  the  public 
for  impartial  consideration. 

I  find  that  the  cumulative  force  of  recent  labor 
events  has  influenced  some  of  these  people  to  discour- 
age the  presentation  of  a  point  of  view  which  is 
characterized  as  distinctly  labor.  It  is  not  that  they 
fail  to  recognize  that  there  is  a  labor  point  of  view, 
but  that  militant  tendencies  within  the  labor  movement 
have  alarmed  them. 

A  one  time  friend  of  the  labor  unions,  whose  good 
services  had  been  frequently  invoked  when  an  inter- 
mediary was  needed  for  the  settlement  of  a  dispute 
between  capital  and  labor,  told  me  it  was  his  opinion 
that  the  time  had  gone  by  for  setting  forth  the  labor 
point  of  view.  As  a  friend  of  labor  he  intended,  he 
said,  to  exert  his  energies  in  putting  a  stop  to  the 
warfare  which  had  developed.  It  was  not,  he  said, 
an  understanding  of  the  warfare  that  was  needed, 
but  a  suppression. 

About  the  same  time  I  learned  from  an  economist, 
who  had  given  much  time  to  the  study  of  labor  con- 
ditions, and  had  formerly  welcomed  a  full  presenta- 


IN8T.  WOHJ3.  REL. 


iv  PREFACE 

tion  of  both  sides,  that  it  was  a  mistake  to  lay  before 
the  people  the  labor  controversy  as  interpreted  or 
viewed  by  organized  labor.  He  took  the  position  that 
there  is  no  labor  side  apart  from  the  public  side,  and, 
therefore,  that  there  is  no  basis  for  a  labor  contro- 
versy. He  had  decided  that  the  time  had  come  when 
social  reform  would  and  should  take  the  place  of 
the  labor  movement. 

This  man,  I  realized,  had  become  partizan, — 
partizan  to  a  program, — and  in  his  partizanship  he 
saw  no  room  for  the  presentation  of  other  programs 
than  those  of  a  nature  similar  to  his  own.  It  hap- 
pened that  I,  too,  was  partizan,  but,  unlike  my  friend, 
I  had  been  partizan  for  many  years,  and  I  have  found 
that  clearly  formulated  programs  presented  by  any 
large  section  of  the  community,  throw  light  on  other 
programs  and  clarify  issues. 

But  from  another  point  of  view  the  partizan  posi- 
tion my  friend  had  taken  was  important.  It  typified 
the  intensity  of  feeling  which  has  centered  around  the 
labor  movement,  and  was  another  evidence  of  the 
need  of  presenting  the  movement,  in  its  several  as- 
pects, from  the  point  of  view  of  those  most  directly 
concerned. 

Any  one  who  has  followed  the  course  of  the  labor 
movement  during  the  past  five  years,  must  realize 
that  it  is  the  cumulative  force  of  recent  labor  events 
which  is  responsible  for  the  intensity  of  outside  in- 
terest.    The   labor   problem   remained   academic    for 


PREFACE  v 

those  outside  until  the  movement  itself  took  on  a  more 
determined  and  militant  aspect.  But  advocacy  of 
pacific  reform  measures  will  not  minimize  interest  in 
what  the  organized  workers  are  proposing  as  long  as 
the  daily  press  reports  the  dramatic  labor  struggles 
which  follow  each  other  in  rapid  succession. 

Newspaper  accounts,  while  stimulating  public  curi- 
osity, do  not  give  an  idea  of  the  movement 
as  a  whole;  the  relation  of  its  parts;  the  controlling 
thoughts  back  of  the  general  movement,  and  the  varia- 
tions in  principles  and  methods.  Neither  do  the  valu- 
able studies  of  single  phases  of  the  movement,  the 
studies  which  make  up  the  literature  of  our  labor 
movement  in  America,  give  a  picture  of  the  movement 
as  a  whole  and  the  contrasting  philosophies,  methods, 
and  forms  of  organization. 

This  book  undertakes  to  give  the  labor  union  point 
of  view  of  labor  union  policies  and  methods  which 
characterize  the  labor  organizations  of  national  repu- 
tation. These  policies  and  methods,  even  the  forms 
of  organization  adopted  and  advocated  by  each,  are 
based  on  certain  "  rights."'  To  the  workers  these 
rights  are  as  real  and  as  inevitable  as  any  of  the  po- 
litical or  religious  rights  claimed  and  secured  in 
earlier  times. 

I  have  not  tried  to  give  the  "  impartial "  view  of 
these  rights,  as  presented  at  times  by  individual  work- 
ers, employers,  or  representatives  of  a  general  public. 
I  have  tried,  rather,  to  express  the  views  of  each  or- 


vi  PREFACE 

ganization  and  their  own  reasons  for  their  line  of 
action. 

In  this  book  the  labor  use  of  terms  has  been  fol- 
lowed, as  well  as  the  labor  point  of  view.  I  have  not, 
for  instance,  recognized  the  classroom  distinction  be- 
tween the  terms  capitalist  and  employer.  To  labor, 
these  terms  are  interchangeable.  They  are  not  so 
used  in  error  or  illiteracy,  as  it  is  often  supposed. 
Like  most  labor  terms,  they  are  true  expressions  of 
the  movements  which  they  represent.  The  use  of  the 
terms  "  capitalist  -  and  "  employer "  follows  the 
classification  in  labor  union  policy  of  excluding  em- 
ployers  from  membership  in  the  unions.  ^  With  a  few 
exceptions  this  distinction  is  made  by  all  labor  unions 
whether  radical  or  conservative.  From  the  labor 
union  point  of  view  it  is  not  important  that  employers, 
through  direction  and  management,  increase  produc- 
tion. The  important  point  is  that  all  employers  are 
representatives  of  capital  and  work_in  its  interest; 
their  allegiance  is,  of  necessity,  to  capital  and  not  to' 
labor.  This  very  difference  in  the  phraseology  of 
labor  and  of  the  student  of  labor  indicates  an  impor- 
tant departure  in  point  of  view. 

I  have  used  the  term  labor  union  not  to  indicate,  as 
it  often  does,  a  mixed  union,  but  to  cover  at  once  the 
industrial  and  trade  union. 

Although  every  subject  treated  in  this  book  has 
been  approached  from  the  standpoint  of  organized 
labor,  I  have  not  spoken  for  any  one  of  the  several 


PREFACE  vii 

groups  of  labor  which  hold  opposing  views  as  to 
rights  and  methods.  I  hold  no  special  brief  for  the 
left  or  the  right  wing  of  the  American  Federation 
of  Labor,  nor  for  the  American  Federation  itself  as 
opposed  to  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World,  nor 
for  the  Railroad  Brotherhoods,  independent  of  the  one 
or  opposed  to  the  other. 

My  object  has  been  to  interpret  each  one  of  these 
organizations  as  it  interprets  itself,  with  this  differ- 
ence:  I  have  noted  the  criticisms  made  by  the  dif- 
ferent groups  within  the  labor  movement  of  each  of 
the  others,  when  these  criticisms  deal  with  funda- 
mental things.  I  have  disregarded  the  differences 
based  on  personal  rivalry.  The  criticisms  made  by 
one  group  of  another  are  as  much  a  part  of  the  labor 
movement  to-day  as  are  the  established  principles  of 
any  one  section.  It  is  the_djsposition  of  all  leaders 
of  all  organized  movements  to  regard  divisions  with- 
in  ajTioyernent  as  a__sjjm  of  weakness.  This  is  par- 
ticularly true  of  the  labor  movement,  whose  universal 
aim  is  unity.  But  there  are  members  of  organized 
labor  throughout  the  country  who  look  on  the  criti- 
cisms and  even  the  divisions  as  signs  of  new  life  and 
strength.  They  regard  each  group  as  an  experiment 
or  trial  in  theories  and  methods  for  the  overcoming 
of  labor's  deadliest  foe, — the  apathy  of  labor  itself. 
Viewed  in  this  light,  the  factions  may  be  a  promise 
of  approach  toward  an  eventual  unity  of  like  interests 
if  not  a  solidarity  of  all  labor. 


viii  PREFACE 

The  total  number  of  men,  women,  and  children  em- 
ployed in  gainful  occupations,  according  to  the  United 
States  census  of  1909,  was  29,073,233.  The  number 
of  workers  in  each  occupational  group  was  as  follows : 

Agriculture 10,381,765 

Professional  Service   1,258,538 

Domestic  or  Personal  Service 5,580,657 

Trade  and  Transportation 4,766,964 

Manufacturing  and  Mechanical  Pursuits 7,085,309 

The  President  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor,  before  a  recent  hearing  of  the  Judiciary  Com- 
mittee of  the  United  States  Senate,  pointed  out  that 
the  field  in  which  the  labor  organizations  operate  is 
confined  to  the  last  two  groups,  that  is,  Trade  and 
Transportation,  and  Manufacturing  and  Mechanical 
Pursuits,  which  together  numbered  11,852,273  work- 
ers. 

Taking  no  note  of  the  members  and  adherents  of 
the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  and  other  in- 
dependent groups,  he  stated  that  the  membership  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor  and  the  Railway 
Brotherhoods  together  was  about  2,500,000,  or  18 
per  cent,  of  the  workers  eligible  to  membership  in 
labor  organizations.  If  some  50,000  were  added,  to 
include  the  members  or  adherents  of  all  other  labor 
unions,  there  would  still  be  left  a  large  field  for  experi- 
mentation in  the  theories  and  methods  of  working  class 
action. 


PREFACE  ix 

The  membership  alone  is  no  indication  of  the  act- 
ual power  of  existing  organization  or  of  group  action. 
The  simple  facts  that  organizations  do  exist,  and  that 
new  ones  may  form  at  any  moment,  for  purposes 
either  temporary  or  permanent,  create  a  potential 
force  equal  in  ultimate  results  to  the  recognized  ac- 
complishments of  the  labor  unions.  The  very  rapidity 
with  which  one  labor  event  has  followed  another  is 
a  measure  of  the  potential  power  of  organized  labor. 
While  the  rapid  succession  of  events  is  making  his- 
tory old  before  the  events  can  be  recorded,  the  com- 
parative values  of  the  principles  and  methods  preached 
and  practised,  can  be  gaged  as  never  before  on  ac- 
count of  their  diversity  and  extended  appeal. 


CONTENTS 


Preface         

I.   Philanthropy   and  Labor  Unions 
II.   American  Federation  of  Labor   . 

III.  The  Railroad  Brotherhoods 

IV.  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World 
V.   Organization  of  Women 

VI.   Industrial  and  Trade  Organization    . 
VII.    Sympathetic   Strike   Action 
VIII.   Union  Recognition  and  the  Union  Shop 
IX.   The  Union   Label        .... 

X.   The   Boycott 

XI.    Arbitration  ...... 

XII.    Legislation  and  the  Unions 

XIII.  The  Conflict  between  Labor  and  the  Courts 

XIV.  Violence 
XV.    Strikes    and    Violence 

XVI.    Sabotage 

XVII.    Limitation  of  Output  . 
XVIII.   Scientific  Management 
XIX.    Labor  in   Politics 
XX.    Direct  Action 
Appendix  : 

Directory  of   A.   F.   of  L.   National  and   International 
Unions         ......... 

I.  W.  W.  Distribution  of  Unions  by  States  and  Ter- 
ritories  

Reference  Notes  of  Citations 

Index     


PAGE 

iii 
i 

ii 

29 

48 

65 

78 

112 

120 

129 

136 

I48 

l62 

180 

188 

200 

215 
222 
230 
243 
249 


255 

26l 
266 
271 


AMERICAN    LABOR    UNIONS 

CHAPTER  I 
PHILANTHROPY  AND  LABOR  UNIONS 

Philanthropic  movement — Difference  between  the  two  move- 
ments, in  aim  and  methods — No  question  of  rivalry — 
Difference  between  benevolent  and  self-imposed  measures 
— Reform  movements  not  co-extensive  with  democracy  but 
with   bureaucracy. 

It  is  a  policy  on  the  part  of  the  most  liberal  of  social 
reformers  to  include  labor  unions  as  far  as  possible 
in  their  many  schemes  for  general  social  uplift.  They 
regard  the  movements  which  they  initiate  for  labor 
and  labor's  own  movements  as  common  agencies  for 
improving  the  material  conditions  surrounding  indus- 
try as  well  as  the  lives  of  the  workers  themselves. 
The  effort  of  the  many  agencies  and  the  improved 
conditions  constitute  the  forces  of  a  "  New  De- 
mocracy "  or  are,  rather,  the  new  democracy  itself.1 
These  agencies  are,  indeed,  not  confined  to  any  class ; 
they  include  employers,  and  they  draw  their  moral 
and  financial  support  from  large  and  small  capitalists. 
There  are  employers  who  are  building  sanitary  work- 
shops and  developing  elaborate  schemes  of  welfare 
work;  women's  clubs  and  consumers'  leagues  are 
^or  Notes,  see  end  of  volume. 


2  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

actively  engaged  in  regulating  the  working  hours  of 
women  and  children  by  legislative  enactments;  asso- 
ciations for  labor  legislation  are  helping  to  secure 
compensation  for  injured  workmen  and  state  regula- 
tion of  dangerous  trades;  safety  committees  have 
forced  the  enactment  of  fire  protection  laws.  The 
churches,  social  settlements,  Christian  and  Hebrew 
associations,  clubs  for  working  women,  and  clubs  for 
working  men  offer  nation-wide  opportunities  to  men 
and  women  of  leisure,  of  professional  and  technical 
training,  of  wealth,  of  social  position,  and  political 
influence  to  share  some  of  their  good  fortune  and  to 
help  in  the  general  effort  to  better  the  lives  of  the 
men,  women,  and  children  who  are  without  the  assets 
of  an  enriched  existence. 

Social  service  has  become  a  profession.  Experts 
in  service  are  developed  through  schools  of  philan- 
thropy and  special  university  courses.  The  movement 
has  passed,  indeed,  through  stages  of  organized  giv- 
ing of  the  rich  to  the  poor  to  extensive  surveys  and 
investigations  into  the  condition  of  the  poor  for  the 
enlightenment  of  those  who  help  in  the  administra- 
tion of  their  lives  and  conditions  of  work.  We  seem 
to  be  on  the  eve  of  witnessing  the  inauguration  and 
administration  of  such  service  by  capital  and  by  the 
state. 

The  whole  movement  received  an  epoch-making 
impulse  in  19 12  and  became  a  national  issue  in  poli- 
tics.    Theodore    Roosevelt,   twice  President  of   the 


PHILANTHROPY  AND  LABOR  UNIONS    3 

United  States  and  candidate  for  a  third  term  at  a 
convention  of  a  new  party  of  his  making,  received 
from  Jane  Addams,  the  most  eminent  prophet  of  the 
new  social  spirit,  the  armor  of  its  aspirations.  His 
cry  at  the  convention,  "  We  stand  at  Armageddon  and 
battle  for  the  Lord,"  was  a  promise  to  thousands  of 
hard  working  reformers  that  their  dreary  years  of 
effort  were  to  be  crowned  with  victory. 

Theories  underlying  the  movements  for  labor  re- 
form were  well  developed  before  they  became  a  na- 
tional political  issue.  For  many,  the  movements  were 
the  expression  of  pure  benevolence.  Others  dis- 
counted the  philanthropic  impulse  or  spirit  as  a  basis 
for  extensive  reform  and  approached  the  problem  of 
devastation  wrought  by  tuberculosis,  industrial  fatigue, 
poison,  accident,  and  death  of  workers  less  from  a 
sense  of  pity  than  from  a  sense  of  the  economic  and 
social  waste.  And  as  social  waste  and  bad  business 
it  has  been  recognized  at  last  by  the  philanthropist  as 
well  as  the  statesman.  Efforts  had  been  made  for 
many  years  to  persuade  capital  that  industrial  fatigue 
and  disease  did  not  pay,  even  in  terms  of  profit.  Capi- 
tal in  various  quarters  recognized  the  point  before 
industrial  betterment  became  a  political  issue.  Lead- 
ing economists  had  successfully  inculcated  the  theory 
among  their  followers  that  every  industrial  advance 
of  labor  is  bound  up  with  a  continued  and  a  progres- 
sive prosperity  on  the  capital  side.  Every  concession 
to  labor  involved  an  equivalent  return  to  capital. 


4  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

There  are  leaders  of  trade  unions  who  seem  to 
support  this  theory;  but,  leaving  the  leaders  out  of 
account  for  the  present,  the  theory  or  the  position 
is  either  instinctively  or  consciously  opposed  by  the 
rank  and  file.  Boldly  stated,  the  position  of  the  labor 
unionist  is  less  work  and  more  pay.  Whether  labor 
does  or  does  not  make  an  equivalent  return  for  what 
capital  concedes  in  wages;  whether  it  pays  or  does 
not  pay  disastrous  prices  for  the  gains  it  calls  its 
own,  are  questions  of  first  importance,  but  they  have 
nothing  to  do  with  the  difference  between  the  atti- 
tude of  the  labor  unionist  and  the  reformer.  This 
difference  in  attitude  is  the  first  point  of  estrange- 
ment between  them.  The  unionist  knows  that  less 
work  and  more  pay  sounds  like  robbery  to  the  re- 
former, as  it  does  to  the  capitalist  and  the  politician. 
The  reformer's  formulation  of  the  case  is  more  pay, 
more  work,  and  better  returns  to  capital.  It  may 
work  out  that  way,  but  it  does  not  sound  straight  as 
a  union  proposition.  The  unionist  knows  that  he 
does  not  expect  to  give  more  or  as  much;  that  the 
very  essence  of  his  fight  is  that  he  gives  too  much. 
If  the  economist  can  prove  to  the  satisfaction  of 
every  one  that  the  capitalist  will  get  more  out  of 
labor  by  giving  more,  well  and  good ;  but  the  unionist 
is  not  comfortable  in  alliance  with  those  who  talk 
that  way. 

The  reformer  or  the  statesman,  moreover,  lays  em- 
phasis on  reforms  which  to  labor  are  secondary  in 


PHILANTHROPY  AND  LABOR  UNIONS   5 

importance.  Sanitary  factories,  fire-drills,  safety  de- 
vices, healthful  processes  of  manufacturing,  are  re- 
forms of  obvious  benefit  to  the  workman;  they  are 
amendments  to  industrial  conditions  which  capital, 
with  sufficient  persuasion,  can  be  induced  to  make. 
But  the  dangers  from  bad  sanitation,  from  fire  and 
special  diseases  of  occupation  are,  to  the  working 
man,  only  a  few  of  the  countless  forces  against  which 
he  is  struggling. 

In  comparison  with  the  under-feeding,  insufficient 
clothing,  and  housing  of  his  family,  which  are  pressing 
and  immediate  necessities,  the  other  dangers  which 
occupy  the  thoughts  of  reformers  are  to  the  union  man 
merely  speculative.  He  is  too  absorbed  in  keeping 
up  living  standards  at  home  to  be  seriously  concerned 
with  the  reforms  of  the  workshop.  Moreover,  the 
average  workman  has  no  very  lively  expectation  of 
the  benefits  received  through  state  action;  they  are  to 
him  in  the  nature  of  vague  promises.  It  is  his  expe- 
rience that  the  adjustment  of  his  vital  interests  de- 
pends on  his  own  efforts.  The  labor  unionist  realizes 
this  more  fully  than  the  common  run  of  workers.  He 
realizes  that  the  shorter  hours  and  higher  wages  which 
he  has  enjoyed  have  come  through  the  direct  and  col- 
lective efforts  of  himself  and  his  fellow  workers.  As 
labor  union  records  show,  the  unions  are  responsible 
for  a  mass  of  legislation,  but  the  hopes  and  the  ef- 
forts of  two  and  a  half  million  organized  workers 
center  rather  around  the  regulation  which  they  are 


6  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

able  to  impose  on  industry  through  their  various 
methods  of  direct  action. 

But  on  other  grounds  the  labor  unionist,  if  he  is 
just  a  union  member  and  not  a  well-seasoned  official, 
is  not  at  home  with  the  industrial  reformer.  Union- 
ists have  joined  with  their  fellow  workers  to  gain  not 
only  better  terms  of  work  and  existence :  their  union 
is  their  declaration  of  independence.  It  bears  the 
same  relation  to  industrial  life  that  other  declara- 
tions of  independence  have  borne  to  political  life. 
Workingmen  who  do  not  join  unions,  consciously  or 
tacitly,  accept  a  position  of  inferiority;  they  virtually 
acknowledge  their  unfitness  to  direct  or  take  part  in 
matters  of  vital  concern  to  them,  their  incapacity  for 
judgment  in  what  affects  most  directly  their  life  of 
work  and  life  of  leisure.  The  labor  unionist  resents 
this  position  of  fellow  wage-earners.  The  men  who 
join  unions  have  a  developed  consciousness  of  their 
own  manhood,  and  their  membership  in  a  union  is  a 
sign  to  the  community  at  large,  no  less  than  it  is  to 
the  employers,  that  they  consider  themselves  capable 
of  directing  their  affairs  and  determining  their  in- 
terests. 

Moreover,  when  labor  men  join  with  reformers  in 
a  common  effort  to  change  this  or  that  condition,  it  is 
their  invariable  experience  that,  even  though  the  re- 
formers' methods  of  attack  do  not  differ  from  their 
own,  the  reformers  dominate  and  the  labor  men  are 
in  the  position,  anomalous  to  them,  of  being  auxiliaries 


PHILANTHROPY  AND  LABOR  UNIONS   7 

to  others  concerned  with  the  administration  of  labor 
affairs.  Labor  unionists  instinctively  resist  the  domi- 
nation of  the  reformer  as  they  have  deliberately  re- 
sisted the  domination  of  the  employer.  They  are  em- 
barrassed by  the  good  intentions  of  the  new  domina- 
tion but  unable  to  meet  it.  They  accept  positions 
of  vice-presidents  while  the  reformers  assume,  quite 
naturally,  the  positions  of  presidents.  The  reformer  is 
equipped  for  the  campaign  with  a  sort  of  training  and 
experience  which  is  not  labor's  and  with  which  labor  is 
unfamiliar.  The  reformers  formulate  their  theories 
and  observations  of  labor  conditions  with  a  marvelous 
precision  which  they  can  execute  precisely  because  they 
are  impersonal.  They  can  formulate  and  execute  their 
propositions  without  any  of  the  inhibiting  influences 
which  enter  into  affairs  of  personal  concern. 

But  for  the  unionist  who  is  invited  to  cooperate  in 
the  execution,  the  propositions  are  filled  with  personal 
import;  there  is  something  strange  and  unreal  about 
the  precision  with  which  they  are  handled  by  the 
expert  reformer.  The  unionist  has  his  inhibitions. 
He  has  not  the  habit  of  formulation.  He  is  not 
practised  in  directing  others.  Cases  may  be  cited 
where  labor  leaders  have  dominated  a  common  move- 
ment made  up  of  all  sorts  of  citizens,  but  they  are 
exceptions.  The  common  relation  and  the  common 
attitude  is  as  I  have  described  it.  Reformers  recog- 
nize their  advantageous  position,  and  they  make  stren- 
uous effort  to  cover  up  inherent  differences,  but  labor 


8  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

is  more  sensitive  to  the  differences  than  the  reformer, 
and  the  efforts  to  make  labor  comfortable  under  such 
circumstances  are  not  strikingly  successful.  It  is  un- 
fair to  cite  cases  where  labor  representatives  dominate 
a  movement  of  citizens,  if  it  is  intended  to  blind  others 
to  the  usual  position  in  which  labor  finds  itself  either 
when  it  enters  movements  initiated  by  reformers  or 
where  reformers  enter  the  labor  movement. 

But  this  being  the  case,  the  reformer  asks  what 
difference  does  it  make?  Is  not  the  elimination  of 
industrial  evils  the  all-important  point?  The  families 
of  wage-earners  are  suffering  from  illness,  unemploy- 
ment, under-feeding,  and  bad  housing.  What  differ- 
ence is  there  between  one  agency  and  another,  except 
their  ability  to  combat  these  evils?  What  difference 
does  it  make  who  secures  compensation  for  the  family 
of  a  workingman  injured  while  at  work,  if  it  is  se- 
cured? What  difference  is  there  between  the  protec- 
tion of  factory  workers  against  fire  whether  secured 
by  a  safety  committee  of  citizens  or  by  a  union?  Does 
not  a  pension  for  the  sick,  the  aged,  or  the  unemployed 
buy  food  or  pay  rent,  whether  secured  by  sociologists 
or  by  labor  unionists?  Does  not  an  eight-hour  day 
give  a  woman  worker  the  same  leisure  if  it  is  granted 
.at  the  instigation  of  a  woman's  club  or  a  woman's 
tmion  ? 

There  is  no  question  of  rivalry  between  the  re- 
form movements  and  the  labor  unions.  Industrial 
devastation  is  wide  and  deep.     Many  movements  of 


PHILANTHROPY  AND  LABOR  UNIONS   9 

national  scope  operate  without  crossing.  But  the  dif- 
ference between  labor's  activity  in  its  own  behalf  and 
the  activity  of  others  in  labor's  interest  is  not  only  a 
matter  of  results.  Immediate  results  may  be  served 
in  either  case,  but  whenever  labor  attacks  the  evils 
which  beset  it,  nezv  power  is  created.  Labor  reforms 
initiated  outside  of  labor  unions  are,  in  their  adminis- 
tration, left  to  state  agents  or  experts.  State  admin- 
istration is  conspicuously  inadequate,  incapable,  and 
indifferent.  Experts  can  successfully  handle  inani- 
mate things,  but  the  fundamental  interests  of  men 
are  neither  successfully  nor  finally  directed  from 
above.  A  successful  administration  of  labor  measures 
requires  labor's  own  constant,  determined  interest  and 
attention.  No  one  can  fail  to  realize  the  truth  of  this 
who  compares  the  efficiency  of  administration  of  labor 
union  measures  within  a  trade  or  industry  and  state 
labor  measures  depending  on  the  inspection  of  state 
officials.  Benevolently  imposed  measures  are  weak 
substitutes  for  those  which  are  self-imposed  and  ad- 
ministered. 

No  one  doubts  that  measures  for  industrial  better- 
ment, as  they  are  initiated  by  philanthropists  or  by 
capital,  and  administered  by  experts  or  state  officials, 
will  make  large  contributions  toward  minimizing 
pjrysical  waste  an^^isea^e-in-jno^exn^njiustry.  It  is, 
indeed,  a  movement  for  sanitation  and  conservation. 
Its  full  realization  would  give  clean  homes,  healthy 
children,  and  efficient  workers.     But  class-conscious 


io  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

labor  wants  much  more.  It  wants  citizenship  in  in- 
dustry. It  is  no  more  willing  to  submit  to  the  rule 
of  the  beneficent  and  efficient  than  were  the  American 
colonists  willing  to  submit  to  the  rule  of  the  British 
Parliament.    Labor  would  rather  be  free  than  clean. 

The  reform  movement  is  not  co-extensive  with 
democracy  but  with  bureaucracy.  The  labor  unions 
are  group  efforts  in  the  direction  of  democracy.  Like 
the  political  efforts  in  the  same  direction,  they  become 
many  times  stultified  and  lead  up  blind  alleys.  But 
the  effort  creates  power.  While  the  economic  gains 
are  themselves  important  and  are  measures  of  strength, 
the  significance  of  the  labor  union  is  its  assertion  of 
the  manhood  of  labor.  The  labor  unionist,  who  has 
no  theory  in  regard  to  the  class  struggle,  is  often  the 
most  class-conscious  of  workingmen.  His  class-con- 
sciousness is  his  innate  self-respect  extended  to  his  class 
and  intensified  in  his  resentment  against  the  position 
which  society  assigns  the  worker. 


CHAPTER  II 
AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR 

Effort  to  establish  its  theory  of  partnership  relations  with  capi- 
tal— Variations  in  purpose  and  methods  within  the  Federa- 
tion— Minority  sentiment — Methods  of  organization — Fed- 
eral character — Conventions — International  unions — Varia- 
tions in  policies  and  government,  autonomy,  disciplinary 
powers — Local  unions — Departments — Executive  councils — 
State  and  city  branches. 

The  theory  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor, 
upheld  by  its  national  representatives  and  a  majority 
of  its  local  officers,  is  that  the  inevitable  dependence 
of  capital  on  labor  and  labor  on  capital  creates  a 
moral  obligation  of  partnership  relations. 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor  was  organized 
thirty-three  years  ago  to  secure,  through  the  method 
of  collective  bargaining,  a  "  fair  share  "  in  the  part- 
nership— a  share  which  capital  had  failed  to  grant 
the  workers  as  individuals. 

The  Federation  claimed  that  labor's  share  in  a  part- 
nership of  natural  or  mutual  interests  gives  it  a  "  right 
to  a  voice  "  in  determining  what  is  a  "  fair  share  "  or 
dividend.  As  organized  groups  of  workers  have  de- 
manded a  voice  in  the  fixing  of  their  share  in  the 
wealth  produced,  they  have  been  met  with  the  in- 
variable answer  from   capital,  "  It  is  none  of  your 


12  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

business,"  or  "I  shall  run  my  business  to  suit  my- 
self." 

The  preamble  to  the  Constitution  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  reads: 

A  struggle  is  going  on  in  all  the  nations  of  the 
civilized  world  between  the  oppressors  and  the  oppressed 
of  all  countries,  a  struggle  between  the  capitalist  and  the 
laborer,  which  grows  in  intensity  from  year  to  year,  and 
will  work  disastrous  results  to  the  toiling  millions  if 
they  are  not  combined  for  mutual  protection  and  benefit.1 

For  thirty-three  years  the  Federation  has  worked 
persistently  to  realize  the  partnership  relations.  It 
has  made  every  friendly  and  peaceful  alliance  which 
has  opened  to  it,  notably  its  alliance  with  the  National 
Civic  Federation,  which  is  made  up  of  representatives 
of  labor  and  capital.  Such  coercive  action  as  strikes 
and  boycotts  the  American  Federation  justifies  on  the 
ground  that  war  is  better  than  oppression  and  that 
oppression  is  as  much  a  part  of  autocracy  in  the  indus- 
trial world  as  it  is,  or  ever  was,  in  the  political.  It 
is  quite  impossible  to  follow  or  understand  the  methods 
of  the  American  Federation  without  keeping  in  mind 
that  every  coercive  act  is  performed  in  the  hope  of 
establishing  a  permanent  and  peaceful  partnership. 

The  national  representatives  of  the  Federation  have 
adhered  to  this  clear-cut  policy.*  As  there  is,  however, 
a  large  provision  for  home  rule  within  the  interna- 
tional organizations  of  the  Federation,  the  theory  and 
policy  of  the  parent  organization  varies  in  application. 
*  See  note  at  end  of  chapter,  p.  28. 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      13 

It  is  important,  therefore,  to  discover  the  tendencies 
of  each  affiliated  organization. 

In  many  of  the  local  and  national  unions,  modifica- 
tions are  evident  in  the  attitude  of  the  members  to- 
ward the  basic  theory  of  partnership  relations  be- 
tween capital  and  labor. 

A  vote,  which  may  be  considered  as  a  test, 
taken  at  the  1912  convention  of  the  American  Fed- 
eration, fixed  the  Socialist  sentiment  as  one-third  of 
the  delegation.  The  vote  was  on  the  election  of  a 
president. 

The  minority  vote  was  cast  by  the  delegates  from 
the  Western  Federation  of  Miners,  the  majority  of 
the  delegates  from  the  United  Mine  Workers,  and  the 
Machinists,  from  the  Brewery  Workers,  and  the 
Journeymen  Tailors,  together  with  votes  of  single 
delegates  from  other  organizations.  The  delegates 
from  the  Western  Federation  of  Miners  were  em- 
phatic in  their  position.  They  explained  that  they 
had  no  choice  in  the  matter,  that  their  members  ap- 
proved of  a  continued  affiliation  with  the  Federation 
for  just  so  long  a  time  as  they  could  successfully  make 
headway  against  the  conservative  or  "  capitalistic " 
policies  of  the  American  Federation. 

But  the  strongest  contrasts  between  unions  within 
the  Federation  do  not  follow  nominal  Socialist  lines. 
The  sharpest  divisions,  those  which  are  most  per- 
sistent and  clear  cut,  are  between  unionists  who  stand 
for  uncompromising  class  action,  and  those  who  ad- 


14  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

vocate  propitiatory  measures  in  the  relation  between 
capital  and  labor.  There  are  delegates,  non-Socialists, 
as  well  as  Socialists,  who  take  opposing  positions  on 
class  action  in  all  the  conventions, — the  conventions 
of  the  American  Federation,  of  the  international 
unions  and  the  state  federations,  and  in  the  weekly- 
meetings  of  the  city  central  organizations. 

The  strongest  trade  union  non-Socialist  representa- 
tives of  San  Francisco,  those  who  have  the  most  in- 
fluence in  labor  councils,  declare  with  pride  that  in 
San  Francisco  they  are  for  labor,  right  or  wrong. 
They  recognize  no  trade  or  industrial  obligation  above 
their  allegiance  to  fellow  unionists  or  to  labor.  They 
consider  that  their  contract  to  stand  by  labor  comes 
first  and  takes  precedence  over "  all  contracts  made 
with  capital. 

At  the  Rochester  convention  of  1912,  Max  Hayes, 
one  of  the  Socialist  leaders,  and  a  member  of  the 
Typographical  Union,  declared  that  he  stood 
by  the  policy  of  his  union  which  upheld  its 
contracts  with  employers  at  any  cost.  He  was 
speaking  to  the  question  of  the  price  of  a 
lost  strike  which  the  Pressmen  had  been  forced 
to  pay  for  the  good  faith  which  the  Typo- 
graphical Union  had  maintained  with  the  Newspaper 
Association  of  Employers.  The  Chicago  Federation 
of  Labor,  representing  the  American  Federation 
unions  of  Chicago,  stood  by  the  Pressmen  and  con- 
demned the  Typographical  Union.     There  are  other 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      15 

city  central  organizations  besides  those  of  Chicago 
and  San  Francisco  which  have  made  such  decisions 
when  the  obligations  to  fellow  unionists  and  contracts 
with  employers  were  in  conflict. 

The  usual  method  of  organization  of  the  Federation 
is  along  craft  or  trade  lines.  It  undertakes  to  meet  the 
inter-dependence  or  overlapping  of  one  craft  on  an- 
other through  its  scheme  of  federation.  But  its  fed- 
eration plan  makes  no  special  provision  for  simulta- 
neous or  sympathetic  action  between  the  unions  of  re- 
lated trades,  as  in  times  of  strikes.  The  solidarity  it 
realizes  through  federation  serves  disciplinary  and 
organization  purposes  within  the  membership.  Its 
purpose  is  to  force  concessions  from  the  employers 
of  separate  trades,  not  to  make  war  on  capital  as  a 
whole. 

This  federal  organization  of  labor  has  located  its 
headquarters  in  the  nation's  capital,  with  a  President, 
Vice-President,  National  Executive  Council,  and  De- 
partments. There  are  forty-two  state  organizations 
chartered  by  the  Federation,  and  six  hundred  and 
twenty-three  city  organizations.  But  it  is  not  the 
state  or  city  organizations  which  form  the  basis  of 
the  Federation.  The  Federation  centers  round  the 
one  hundred  and  eleven  national  and  international 
unions  which  it  charters  for  the  purpose  of  organizing 
the  workers  of  the  country,  not  geographically,  but  by 
trades,  throughout  the  United  States  and  Canada. 
These   national    or   international   unions   are   supple- 


16  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

merited  by  six  hundred  and  forty-two  local  trade  and 
federal  labor  unions  chartered  directly  by  the  National 
Executive  Council  of  the  Federation. 

A  convention  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor 
is  held  annually.  It  is  made  up  of  delegates  from  all 
the  chartered  unions,  who  pass  on  business  of  inter- 
est to  the  Federation  as  a  whole  and  to  the  affiliated 
organizations.  At  these  conventions  the  officers  and 
Executive  Council  are  elected  for  the  following  year. 
The  Federation  is  supported  by  a  per  capita  tax  levied 
on  all  the  chartered  unions. 

The  one  hundred  and  ten  national,  or,  as  they 
are  usually  called,  international  unions,  chartered  by 
the  Federation,  are  given  jurisdiction  over  organiza- 
tion within  prescribed  trade  or  industrial  lines. 

These  international  unions  in  turn  issue  charters  to 
local  unions,  giving  them  the  right  to  organize  the 
workers  within  a  prescribed  locality,  coming  under 
the  jurisdictional  provisions  of  the  international  char- 
ter. There  are  20,046  local  unions  chartered  by  the 
internationals.  A  local  union  is  known  by  a  number, 
as  Local  Union  25  of  the  International  Ladies'  Gar- 
ment Workers.  The  local  unions  pay  a  per  capita  tax 
in  support  of  the  international  unions. 

The  laws  governing  the  election  of  officers,  the 
duties  of  officers,  the  holding  of  conventions,  the  fix- 
ing of  dues  and  initiation  fees,  the  terms  of  contract- 
ing or  bargaining  with  employers,  as  well  as  organiza- 
tion actually  accomplished,   are  determined  by  each 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      17 

international  union.  Once  in  possession  of  the  char- 
ter the  autonomy  of  an  international  union  is  complete, 
so  long  as  it  does  not  encroach  on  territory  assigned 
another  international. 

Within  its  assigned  field  it  may  organize  every 
worker  or  it  may  lie  down  on  its  job.  The  Federa- 
tion, by  its  own  laws,  may  grant  no  other  group  of 
workers  a  charter  in  the  same  field  so  long  as  the 
original  organization  observes  the  requirements  of  its 
charter,  and  pays  its  per  capita  tax.  It  considers  any 
other  group  which  operates  in  the  same  field,  a  "  dual," 
that  is,  a  rival  organization,  and  inimical  to  the  in- 
terests of  unity. 

The  international  unions,  on  the  other  hand,  allow 
their  local  unions  a  minimum  of  home  rule,  and  are 
directly  responsible  for  the  failure  or  success  of  a 
local,  as  well  as  for  the  extent  of  the  organization  of 
the  trade  within  a  locality. 

The  character  of  the  internationals  varies  as  to 
method  and  forms,  as  well  as  to  principles  of  action. 
The  Typographical  Union,  for  instance,  is  a  genuine 
craft  organization,  after  the  general  policy  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  while  the  United 
Mine  Workers'  Union,  the  largest  of  all  the  unions  of 
the  American  Federation,  is  industrially  organized,  in- 
cluding every  worker  in  or  around  the  mines  in  one 
union. 

The  label  method  of  organization,  explained  in  an- 
other chapter,  is  used  exclusively  by  some  unions, — 


18  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

it  is  discarded  or  deprecated  by  others,  although  the 
Federation  urges  all  of  its  allied  unions  to  adopt  it. 

Again,  on  the  question  of  political  action,  the  in- 
ternationals take  opposing  positions.  Some  of  the 
unions  support  the  policy  recommended  by  the  Fed- 
eration,— that  the  unions  enter  into  an  active,  non- 
partizan,  pro-trade  union  campaign,  supporting  that 
one  of  the  dominant  parties  which  stands  for  trade 
union  measures.  Other  unions  oppose  this  policy  and 
take  no  part  in  politics.  Still  others  work  for  the 
election  of  candidates  on  a  Socialist  ticket,  and  urge 
the  Federation  to  support  exclusively  Socialist  Party 
candidates. 

While  it  is  the  invariable  policy  of  the  international 
unions  to  establish  if  possible  partnership  relations 
with  employers,  they  vary  in  their  expressions  of 
confidence  in  the  mutuality  of  interests.  The  Boot 
and  Shoe  Workers'  Union,  for  instance,  look  to  the 
boot  and  shoe  manufacturers  to  employ  trade  union 
members  as  agents  to  advertise  their  label  and  their 
label  goods;  they  request  the  manufacturers  to  sup- 
port a  trade  union  member  as  joint  agent  for  the 
union  and  manufacturers  at  Washington  to  insure 
the  passage  of  tariff  legislation  which  they  consider 
of  like  importance  to  capital  and  labor.  The  Leather 
Workers,  on  the  other  hand,  refuse  to  cooperate  with 
the  manufacturers  in  securing  tariff  legislation.  They 
say  that  the  tariff  is  of  no  interest  to  labor,  and  that 
all  benefit  from  a  protective  tariff  goes  to  capital.    In 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      19 

support  of  their  position  they  quote  the  manufacturers 
themselves,  who  stated  before  Congress  that  tariff  on 
leather  is  for  the  protection  of  capital,  and  that  it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  wages;  that  "they  (labor)  have 
gone  through  blood  to  get  their  increase  in  wages."  2 
While  this  allowance  for  differences  in  policy  gives 
each  international  organization  full  opportunity  for 
individual  expression,  the  American  Federation,  ac- 
cording to  its  own  constitution,  has  no  power  to  check 
the  domination  of  the  international  unions  over  their 
own  local  unions.  That  is,  the  actual  membership 
of  the  Federation  is  not  protected  from  the  evils  of 
centralized  power.  The  international  organizations 
undertake  to  make  and  keep  the  policy  of  their  locals 
uniform.  With  a  few  exceptions  they  have  been  suc- 
cessful in  this.  Although  this  adds  to  the  difficulty 
of  reshaping  policies,  the  changes  which  do  occur, 
invariably  originate  within  local  unions.  The  local 
unions,  with  a  keen  and  active  membership,  have 
reversed  the  traditions  and  practices  of  their  interna- 
tionals. But  it  is  not  always  within  the  power  of  a 
rebellious  membership  to  affect  the  character  of  their 
organization.  The  large  amount  of  autocratic  power 
reserved  by  the  internationals  makes  membership  rule 
difficult,  and,  at  times,  impossible.  At  any  time  the 
international  may  withdraw  the  charter  of  a  rebellious 
local  and  form  a  new  local,  leaving  the  old  to  operate 
as  a  dual  organization.  Locals  find  their  wings  ef- 
fectually clipped  under  such  circumstances.    The  whole 


20  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  is  against  them. 
There  is  a  provision  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Fed- 
eration which  reads : 

No  Central  Labor  Union,  or  any  other  central  body 
of  delegates,  shall  admit  to  or  retain  in  their  councils 
delegates  from  any  local  organization  that  owes  its  al- 
legiance to  any  other  body,  National  or  International, 
hostile  to  any  affiliated  organization,  or  that  has  been 
suspended  or  expelled  by,  or  not  connected  with,  a  Na- 
tional or  International  organization  of  their  trade  here- 
inafter affiliated,  under  penalty  of  having  their  charter 
revoked  for  violation  of  their  charter,  subject  to  appeal 
to  the  next  convention.3 

This  means  to  a  local  union  that  the  displeasure  of 
the  parent  organization,  and  the  withdrawal  of  local 
charters,  place  it  outside  the  pale.  In  times  of  strike 
such  locals  are  refused  their  only  means  of  support, 
the  backing  of  organized  labor.  Their  strikes  are  not 
recognized  as  strikes,  and  the  places  of  strikers  may 
be  filled  by  members  of  the  American  Federation  of 
Labor.  Within  this  provision  lies  the  disciplinary 
power  of  the  Federation  of  Labor,  which  is  seldom 
broken  except  by  city  central  bodies  like  the  Chicago 
Federation  of  Labor  and  San  Francisco  Labor  Council, 
which  are  stronger  at  times  in  their  influence  than  an 
international  organization. 

As  has  been  explained,  the  national  unions  of  the 
Federation  are  divided  into  what  are  called  local 
unions.     There  are  also  local  unions  affiliated  directly 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      21 

with  the  Federation  without  allegiance  to  an  in- 
ternational union.  In  trades  where  no  internationals 
exist,  the  Federation  grants  charters  to  organizations 
of  eleven  or  more  workers  of  a  trade  in  one  locality. 
These  are  also  called  local  unions.  When  seven  or 
more  of  these  locals  desire  consolidation,  they  make 
application  to  the  Federation,  which  withdraws  the 
individual  charters  and  issues  a  charter  to  an  interna- 
tional union,  which  re-issues  individual  charters  to 
the  locals  which  formed  it. 

In  localities  where  there  are  not  enough  wage- 
earners  in  any  one  trade  to  organize  as  a  local  trade 
union,  or  where  there  are  not  enough  who  desire  or- 
ganization, workers  of  miscellaneous  trades  are 
grouped  together  in  what  the  Federation  calls  Federal 
Labor  Unions.  There  are  six  hundred  and  forty-two 
of  these  Local  Trade  and  Federal  Labor  Unions. 

For  many  years  the  strength  of  the  American  Fed- 
eration has  been  sapped  by  what  are  commonly  known 
as  jurisdiction  fights.  The  international  unions  are 
still  appealing  to  the  Federation,  which  prescribes  the 
boundaries  of  each,  to  decide  on  the  question  of  dis- 
puted territory.  These  disputes  have  consumed  a  large 
part  of  the  time  of  the  national  conventions,  the  time 
of  the  national  officers,  they  have  at  times  seriously 
interfered  with  the  progress  of  organization  of  work- 
ers, and  they  have  developed  an  attitude  of  hostility 
between  union  and  union  which  has  affected  the 
solidarity  of  the  movement. 


22  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

It  was  for  the  purpose  of  unity  that  the  departments 
were  created.  These  departments  are  made  up  of 
representatives  from  national  unions  which  are  closely 
allied  by  the  nature  of  the  trades  they  represent.  It 
is  intended  that  the  disputes  which  arise  between  the 
unions  of  related  trades  shall  be  taken  up  and  disposed 
of,  so  far  as  possible,  by  the  department  in  which 
they  are  represented.  The  departments  represent 
only  those  national  unions  which  care  to  affiliate 
with  them  and  which  are  chartered  by  the  Federation. 

The  Building  Trades  Department  includes : 

Asbestos  Workers  Machinists 

Bridge  and  Structural  Iron  Marble  Workers 

Carpenters  Sheet  Metal  Workers 

Cement  Workers  Painters 

Electrical  Workers  Plasterers 

Elevator  Constructors  Plumbers 

Steam  Engineers  Roofers 

Granite  Cutters  Slate  and  Tile  Workers 

Hod  Carriers  Stone  Cutters 

Wood  Wire  Weavers  Tile  Layers,  etc. 

The  Metal  Trades  Department  includes: 

Sheet  Metal  Workers  Molders 

Blacksmiths  Metal   Polishers,   Buffers,  and 

Boiler  Makers  and  Iron  Ship-  Platers 

builders  Pattern  Makers 

Electrical  Workers  Plumbers  and  Gasfitters 

Engineers  Stove  Mounters 
Machinists 

The  Railroad  Employees'  Department  includes: 

Machinists  Blacksmiths 

Boilermakers   and    Iron   Ship-       Sheet  Metal  Workers 
builders  Railway  Carmen 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      23 

Plumbers,       Gasfitters,       and      Railway  Clerks 

Steamfitters  Steam  Shovelmen 

Electrical  Workers  Switchmen 

The  Mining  Department  includes : 

The    Western    Federation    of      The  United  Mine  Workers 

Miners  Steam  Shovelmen 

Iron,  Tin  and  Steel  Workers 

The  Union  Label  Trades  Department  proposes  to 
unify  and  extend  the  union  label  method  of  organiza- 
tion. The  following  unions  use  a  label  or  card  which 
stands  for  a  particular  trade  and  is  granted  to  the 
manufacturers  of  the  trade,  who  observe  the  condi- 
tions required  by  the  union.  Thirty-eight  of  the  fol- 
lowing fifty-seven  international  unions,  using  a  label 
or  card,  are  represented  in  the  Union  Label  Trades 
Department : 

American  Federation  of  Labor  Glass  Workers 

Bakers  and  Confectioners  Glove  Workers 

Barbers  Grinders  and  Finishers 

Bill  Posters  and  Billers  Hatters 

Boilermakers  Horseshoers 

Blacksmiths  Hotel  Workers 

Bookbinders  Jewelry  Workers 

Boot  and  Shoe  Workers  Lathers 

Brewery  Workmen  Laundry  Workers 

Brickmakers  Leather  Workers 

Broom-makers  Lithographers 

Brushmakers  Machine  Printers 

Carpenters  and  Joiners  Machinists 

Carriage  and  Wagon  Workers  Marble  Workers 

Cigarmakers  Metal  Polishers 

Cloth  Hat  and  Capmakers  Metal  Workers 

Coopers  Molders 

Garment  Workers   (men's)  Painters 

Garment  Workers    (women's)  Papermakers 


24  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Photo  Engravers  Tailors 

Piano  and  Organ  Workers  Textile  Workers 

Plate  Printers  Tip  Printers 

Powder  Workers  Tobacco  Workers 

Printing  Pressmen  Travelers'  Goods  and  Leather 

Print  Cutters  Novelty  Workers 

Sawsmiths  Typographical  Union 

Shingle  Weavers  Upholsterers 

Slate  Workers  Wire  Weavers 

Stove  Mounters  Wood  Carvers 

The  officers  and  the  Executive  Council  conduct  all 
business  between  the  sessions  of  the  annual  conven- 
tions which  does  not  belong  to  any  one  affiliated  or- 
ganization, and  execute  the  instructions  of  the  conven- 
tions. 

They  have  given  an  increasing  amount  of  time  and 
attention  to  federal  legislation,  and,  since  1906,  to 
national  politics.  The  character  of  this  legislation 
indicates  the  position  taken  by  the  Federation  on 
questions  relating  to  labor  as  well  as  on  questions  of 
general  interest.     (See  Chapter  on  Legislation.) 

The  routine  work  of  the  Council  covers  a  multitude 
of  matters  of  importance  to  the  organization;  the 
granting  of  charters  to  new  unions,  the  settlement  of 
innumerable  jurisdictional  disputes,  general  organiza- 
tion work  in  unorganized  districts  and  trades,  and  sup- 
port of  special  union  interests  through  the  levying  of 
assessments.  It  also  makes  connections  with  groups 
of  people  other  than  unionists  who  are  interested  in 
problems  of  interest  to  the  Federation,  and  publishes 
a  monthly  magazine,  The  American  Federationist,  and 
a  weekly  "  News  Letter." 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      25 

Every  local  union  affiliated  directly  or  indirectly 
with  an  international  union  is  expected  and  entitled 
to  affiliate  with  the  Central  Labor  Union,  chartered  by 
the  American  Federation,  in  the  city  in  which  it  is 
located.  These  city  organizations  exist  to  look  after 
matters  of  local  concern  to  all  the  local  unions  af- 
filiated with  them. 

The  city  organization  is  not  supposed  to  interfere 
in  a  trade  situation  where  local  trade  organization  ex- 
ists, except  at  the  invitation  of  the  local  union  of  the 
trade,  and  it  is  not  expected  to  organize  in  a  trade 
locally  unorganized,  except  under  the  direction  or  in 
cooperation  with  the  national  union  which  holds  juris- 
dictional rights  over  the  trade.  A  city  central  may 
not  cooperate  with  a  local  union  if  the  national  union 
offers  objections.  If  it  does  so,  it  may  suffer  the 
penalty  of  losing  its  own  A.  F.  of  L.  charter.  As 
was  noted  above,  certain  city  central  unions  have  de- 
fied the  international  unions  in  backing  up  a  rebellious 
local  without  losing  their  connection  with  the  Fed- 
eration, but  such  defiance  is  based  on  exceptional 
strength  and  unusual  local  vitality. 

Many  city  central  unions  have  taken  part  in  local 
politics,  usually  unofficially,  and  have  given  important 
support  to  a  political  measure  or  political  candidate 
for  office.  They  undertake  to  secure  the  employment 
of  union  labor  in  city  contracts  and  the  passage  of 
city  ordinances  of  interest  to  organized  labor. 

The   thirty-two   State   Branches   are   chartered   by 


26  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  Federation,  primarily  to  secure  the  enactment  of 
laws  for  the  protection  and  advancement  of  labor  in 
the  state  through  the  state  legislatures. 

These  branches  are  made  up  from  the  local  unions 
and  the  city  central  organizations  within  the  state, 
chartered  by  the  Federation.  The  branches  usually 
hold  annual  or  biennial  conventions,  when  legislative 
programs  are  drawn  up,  and  a  campaign  is  organized 
for  the  coming  session  of  the  state  legislature.  The 
bulk  of  the  laws  for  the  protection  of  labor  have 
been  secured  through  these  agencies.  (See  Chapter  on 
Legislation.) 

There  is  no  means  of  measuring  the  value  or  the 
extent  of  the  educational  work  of  the  American  Fed- 
eration. For  thirty-three  years  it  has  been  teaching 
the  lessons  of  collective  action  and  organization  to 
labor  in  every  state  in  the  country.  The  2,000,000 
men  and  women  who  are  members  are  only  a  small 
fraction  of  the  workers  who  have  learned  through  the 
Federation  the  futility  of  competing  against  others 
for  a  wage.  The  membership  represents  workers 
who  have  gained  a  sufficient  foothold  in  a  trade  or 
industry  to  make  it  possible  for  them  to  declare  their 
allegiance  to  their  union  without  paying  the  penalty 
of  losing  their  jobs. 

Through  association,  the  union  men  and  women 
have  learned  to  guard  jealously  respect  for  workers  as 
a  class;  they  resent  the  position  of  ignominy  and  degra- 
dation to  which  their  class  is  assigned. 


AMERICAN  FEDERATION  OF  LABOR      27 

It  would  be  difficult  to  measure  the  economic  gains 
which  the  trade  organizations  have  secured,  or  realize 
what  labor's  position  would  be  to-day  without  them. 
If  each  union  reported  the  wage  gains  directly  con- 
ceded the  union,  the  real  gain  could  not  be  determined 
without  fixing  in  terms  equally  exact  the  proportional 
increase  in  cost  of  living  which  fell  to  organized 
workers,  if  not  to  labor  in  general.  Even  were  such 
computations  possible,  a  still  more  important  factor 
would  need  to  be  determined,  namely,  the  effect  on 
the  general  wage  rate  in  the  whole  labor  market  which 
the  potentiality  of  labor  organization  exerts. 

The  report  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Federation  for 
19 1 3  showed  that  forty-five  international  unions  had 
made  3,190  settlements  for  improved  conditions  with- 
out striking.  These  figures  give  no  idea  of  existing 
agreements,  as  unions  in  several  cases  reported  that 
"  a  great  number  "  or  "  many  "  settlements  were  made 
during  the  year,  and  no  union  reported  the  still  greater 
number  of  contracts  or  agreements  which  were  opera- 
tive either  through  an  unexpired  term,  or  which  were 
indeterminate,  or  the  still  greater  gains  which  thou- 
sands of  union  workers  were  enjoying  by  tacit 
understanding  without  resorting  to  formal  con- 
tract. 

The  same  report  shows  that  974  strikes  in  67  inter- 
national unions  occurred  during  the  year.  This  re- 
port, together  with  the  foregoing,  gives  some  idea  of 
the  policy  of  the  Federation,  and  its  determination  to 


28  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

establish  by  methods  of  peace,  rather  than  war,  labor's 
part  in  fixing  conditions  of  work. 

If  the  Federation  is  tenacious  in  relation  to  methods; 
if  it  hesitates  to  change  old  forms  for  new,  it  is  be- 
cause its  unions  have  made  present  and  heavy  sacrifices 
for  future  gains.  When  revolutionary  unionists  de- 
mand that  trade  unions  withdraw  all  restrictions  it  is 
in  many  cases  equivalent  to  a  demand  on  men  who 
own  more  tangible  forms  of  private  property  that  they 
surrender  the  keys.  It  is  important  to  keep  clearly  in 
mind  the  purposes  of  conservative  and  revolutionary 
unionism  to  realize  the  integrity  of  each. 

Note. — Before  a  recent  hearing  of  the  Commission  on  Indus- 
trial Relations,  the  President  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  seemed  to 
deny  the  Socialist  position  that  the  A.  F.  of  L.  acknowledged 
the  mutual  obligations  and  interests  of  capital  and  labor.  But 
his  statement  that  he  did  not  consider  the  interests  of  the 
two  classes  "  harmonious "  was  not  a  refutation  of  the  So- 
cialist criticism  nor  an  endorsement  of  the  Socialist  position 
that  there   is   no   basis   for  agreement.     (See  p.   12.) 


CHAPTER  III 
THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS 

Conservatism — Common  characteristics  of  the  four  organizations 
— Mutual  insurance  associations — "  Protective  policy  " — 
Arbitration  as  a  substitute  for  strikes — The  Erdman  Act — 
Development  of  "  protective  policy  " — Territorial  divisions 
and  concerted  movements — Standardization — Federation — 
Repudiation    of   coercive   methods. 

There  are  unions  of  railroad  workers  which  are  a 
part  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  such  as 
the  car  builders,  shop  and  road  builders  and  repairers, 
telegraphers,  machinists,  and,  in  a  limited  district, 
switchmen.  But  the  most  important  unions  of  railroad 
workers  are  independent  of  the  American  Federation, 
and  represent  a  distinct  type  of  labor  organization. 
These  unions  are :  The  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive 
Engineers,  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen 
and  Enginemen,  the  Brotherhood  of  Railway  Train- 
men, which  includes  conductors,  baggagemen,  brake- 
men,  flagmen,  switchmen  in  yard  and  train  service, 
and  the  Order  of  Railway  Conductors. 

These  four  organizations  with  their  common  char- 
acteristics and  their  independence  of  the  general  union 
movement,  are  often  briefly  characterized  as  conserva- 
tive by  labor  union  men  whose  own  organizations  are 
as  conservative  in  purpose  and  in  administration  as 


30  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

are  the  brotherhoods  of  railroad  workers.  But  con- 
servative unions  of  the  American  Federation  recog- 
nize a  common  labor  movement  by  becoming  a  part 
of  it  and  this  the  brotherhoods  have  refused  to  do. 
While  many  of  the  unions  of  the  American  Federation 
give  only  a  nominal  or  official  recognition  to  the  idea 
of  labor  unity,  the  position  taken  by  the  brotherhoods 
frankly  and  squarely  places  the  emphasis  on  unity  of 
interests  between  limited  groups  of  workers  and  their 
employers.  Although  some  of  the  unions  of  the  Fed- 
eration are  intent  on  the  limited  unity,  they  have 
not  sufficient  confidence  in  their  own  strength  to  take 
a  position  of  independence. 

The  brotherhoods  have  depended  on  their  conserva- 
tism for  their  growth.  Their  tenets  as  well  as  their 
history  are  testimonials  to  their  faith  in  established 
institutions.  They  lay  stress  on  the  personal  conduct 
of  their  members,  and  make  no  complaints  against 
the  exploitation  of  a  class.  The  cardinal  principles 
of  the  Brotherhood  of  lLocomotive  Engineers  are 
"  sobriety,  truth,  justice,  and  morality."  A  brother 
may  be  expelled  from  membership  for  intoxication, 
the  keeping  of  a  saloon  or  attending  a  bar,  for  habitual 
gambling  or  for  making  money  through  a  gambling 
house.  The  preamble  includes  a  statement  recognizing 
the  need  for  coordination  of  capital  and  labor,  and  the 
cultivation  of  amicable  relations  with  employers.  The 
motto  of  the  Firemen  is  "  protection,  charity,  sobriety, 
and  industry."     They  also  declare  their  belief  in  the 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         31 

identity  of  interests  between  worker  and  employer, 
the  necessity  of  cooperation  and  the  cultivation  of 
harmony.  The  Brotherhood  of  Trainmen  affirms  its 
intention  of  establishing  mutual  confidence  and  har- 
monious relations;  and  its  rules  of  conduct,  as  well 
as  the  rules  of  the  Conductors'  Order,  are  emphatic 
and  strenuous  mandates  which  members  disobey  at 
risk  of  membership. 

The  editor  of  the  Railroad  Trainman  writes : 

The  Brotherhood  has  tried  to  be  fair  to  the  public, 
the  employer,  and  itself.  It  has  accepted  its  responsibili- 
ties and  consistently  stood  by  what  it  has  agreed  to  do, 
although  there  have  been  times  when  taking  that  posi- 
tion brought  upon  it  the  most  bitter  censure  from  those 
who  have  as  yet  to  learn  that  a  labor  organization,  to  be 
successful,  must  be  a  business  organization  that  holds  its 
word  as  sacred  as  its  bond.  .  .  .  Our  educational  work 
has  been  of  a  practical  nature  calculated  to  have  the  men 
understand  their  side  of  every  question  and  at  the  same 
time  realize  that  the  industrial  question  is  not  one-sided 
by  any  means,  but  that  the  rights  and  privileges  of  the 
employer  are  as  equally  entitled  to  consideration  as  are 
the  rights  and  privileges  of  themselves.  In  a  word, 
the  Brotherhood  has  attempted  to  bring  about  a  fair 
understanding  as  to  the  rights  between  the  employer 
and  the  employee. l 

The  editor  is  fully  justified  in  saying  that  the  ef- 
forts of  the  Trainmen  (and  he  might  have  added  that 
the  efforts  of  the  other  brotherhoods)  to  become  a 
business  organization  have  brought  upon  it  bitter 
criticism.     Some  radical  labor  unions  object  strenu- 


32  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ously  to  business  organizations  and  their  methods; 
they  consider  that  the  first  lesson  in  labor  organization 
is  class  opposition  to  the  whole  business  institution. 
But  the  brotherhoods  have  no  intention  of  changing 
the  industrial  system.  They  have  no  desire  to  disturb 
the  relation  of  master  and  servant.  They  are  conscien- 
tious upholders  of  the  existing  social  order.  It  is 
their  concern  to  maintain  a  standing  in  the  community 
which  will  conform  to  what  is  expected  of  skilled 
workingmen.  In  their  advancement  and  in  their 
growth  in  membership  they  have  given  signal  evi- 
dence of  their  loyalty  to  the  laws  and  the  customs  of 
the  country.  It  is,  indeed,  due  to  the  efforts  of  the 
brotherhoods,  and  not  to  the  railroad  managements, 
that  peace  and  continuous  service  on  the  roads  are 
preserved. 

The  history  of  railroad  systems  in  America  is  re- 
plete with  tales  of  recklessness  in  the  management 
of  finances.  But  as  conservers  of  social  institutions 
the  sins  of  financial  manipulation  are  trifling  in  com- 
parison with  the  failures  of  directors  to  deal  gener- 
ously with  the  brotherhoods.  In  one  case  they  specu- 
lated with  the  savings  of  stockholders  and  the  sur- 
vival of  their  own  particular  administration.  In  the 
other  case  they  speculated  with  the  contentment  and 
the  faith  of  the  workers  in  the  established  social  order. 
They  do,  it  is  true,  treat  with  the  brotherhoods,  and 
on  some  systems  they  are  to-day  meeting  them  half- 
way; but  the  brotherhoods  have  worked  unceasingly 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         33 

for  "  fair  conditions  "  and  have  sacrificed  the  hopes 
of  thousands  of  men  in  their  efforts  to  gain  them. 

The  brotherhoods  were  organized  originally,  not  as 
labor  unions,  but  as  mutual  insurance  societies.  Rail- 
road employment  is  listed  as  extra  hazardous  by  some 
of  the  insurance  companies.  None  of  the  companies 
issue  policies  which  meet  the  needs  of  the  men  in  the 
service.  It  does  not  pay  to  meet  the  needs  of  men, 
who,  as  a  class,  are  killed  at  the  rate  of  nine  a  day,  or 
three  thousand  a  year.  No  profit-making  business  in- 
volving life  and  death  chances  can  afford  to  hold  out 
inducements  to  men  who  in  seventeen  years  will  all 
be  dead  or  totally  disabled.  It  has  been  estimated 
that  the  cost  of  insurance  of  railroad  workers  charged 
by  the  ordinary  insurance  companies  is  more  than 
thirty  per  cent,  above  that  charged  by  the  brother- 
hoods. This  estimate  would  be  much  higher  than  it  is 
had  the  difference  between  the  rates  which  the  regular 
insurance  companies  would  charge  for  insurance 
against  disability  been  taken  into  consideration.  Dis- 
ability even  more  than  death  brings  disaster  to  the 
homes  of  men  in  railroad  service. 

Railroad  workers  are  probably  endowed  with  the 
usual  amount  of  fatalism  that  goes  with  meeting  con- 
stant danger.  However  that  may  be,  it  was  with  the 
inertia  of  fatalists  that  they  set  to  work  to  patch  up 
their  tragedies  instead  of  preventing  the  wholesale 
slaughter  which  has  characterized  their  employment. 
The  brotherhoods  have  managed  their  insurance  busi- 


34  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ness  with  great  skill.  Many  millions  of  dollars  have 
been  paid  out  from  their  insurance  funds,  and  life  in 
times  of  greatest  stress  has  been  made  more  endurable 
for  thousands  of  men  and  their  families. 

The  large  membership  of  the  brotherhoods  is  un- 
questionably due  to  the  insurance  features  of  the  or- 
ganization, rather  than  to  the  collective  bargaining, 
or  the  "  protective  features,"  as  they  call  their  trade 
agreements,  which  were  introduced  in  the  early  years 
of  organization.  The  membership  statistics  are  re- 
markable. Seventy-two  thousand  locomotive  engi- 
neers, or  ninety  per  cent,  of  the  locomotive  engineers 
of  the  country,  are  members  of  the  Brotherhood  of 
Locomotive  Engineers.  The  Order  of  Railway  Con- 
ductors, covering  also  ninety  per  cent,  of  the  conduc- 
tors, has  a  membership  of  49,000.  The  membership 
of  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen  and  En- 
ginemen,  including  both  firemen  and  engineers,  is 
90,000.  And  the  Brotherhood  of  Railway  Trainmen, 
including  conductors,  baggagemen,  brakemen,  flagmen, 
and  switchmen  in  yard  and  train  service,  has  a  mem- 
bership of  135,000. 

Their  first  efforts  to  change  their  wage  conditions 
through  their  organizations  were  met  with  bitter  and 
unrelenting  opposition  by  the  management  of  the 
roads.  The  Firemen,  for  example,  adopted  the  "  pro- 
tective policy  "  in  1879,  tw0  years  after  the  organiza- 
tion of  their  insurance  business.  They  were  forced 
to  abandon  it  after  a  brief  experience  on  account  of  the 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         35 

opposition  of  the  railroad  management.  In  1885  they 
reintroduced  the  policy  of  collective  bargaining,  and 
have  continued  ever  since  to  develop  it. 

While  the  insurance  features  of  the  brotherhoods 
have  protected  members,  they  are  also  responsible  for 
the  unfailing  conservatism  of  the  organizations.  A 
member  who  has  invested  in  a  policy  and  has  carried 
that  policy  for  several  years  and  is  counting  on  its 
protection  is  wary  of  strikes  or  other  experiments 
involving  risk.  It  is  well  recognized  that  trade  union 
officials  who  are  the  trustees  of  large  benefit  funds  or 
insurance  features  of  unions  are  more  sensitive  to  a 
disturbance  of  the  treasury  than  to  the  economic  posi- 
tion of  their  members  or  their  relation  to  their  em- 
ployers. 

The  insurance  features  are  used  as  disciplinary 
weapons  by  the  organization.  Men  who  strike  without 
the  sanction  of  the  organization  in  which  they  are 
insured  and  hold  membership  are  expelled  from  the 
Brotherhoods  of  Trainmen  and  Firemen.  On  the 
other  hand,  in  no  one  of  the  organizations  can  a  man 
retain  membership  who  has  scabbed  in  an  authorized 
strike. 

The  avoidance  of  strikes  is  a  business  principle  of 
the  brotherhoods.  It  has  also  become  a  virtue  and  a 
social  responsibility  assumed  by  the  officers.  The  tak- 
ing of  a  strike  vote  is  a  part  of  the  required  prepara- 
tion for  arbitration  proceedings,  as  explained  else- 
where. 


36  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

During  arbitration  proceedings  it  is  usual  for  the 
managers  of  the  companies  to  point  to  the  extension 
of  organization  among  the  railroad  workers  and  the 
movements  for  concerted  action  over  extended  terri- 
tories and  between  the  brotherhoods,  and  to  interpret 
the  extension  as  a  preparation  for  a  general  strike. 
Mr.  Morrissy,  representing  the  engineers  on  the  arbi- 
tration board  of  1912,  in  signing  the  minority  report 
of  the  board,  expressed  the  attitude  of  the  brother- 
hoods on  the  question  of  the  general  strike.  He 
did  not  consider  that  the  majority  report  had  reason 
for  referring  to  the  railroad  strike  in  France  in 
1910  in  comparing  the  situation  in  the  United 
States. 

The  comparison  fails  to  note  the  difference  between 
the  general  strike  of  engineers  and  that  of  all  the  rail- 
way employees,  which  was  the  case  or  at  least  attempted 
in  France.  Another  phase  with  which  there  can  be  no 
comparison  of  an  assumed  situation  in  this  country  is 
that  the  French  strike  was  a  part  of  a  program  of 
European  syndicalism.  The  general  strike  is  no  part  of 
the  American  railway  employees'  program.  In  brief, 
the  analogy  which  the  majority  report  attempts  to  make, 
would  require  all  the  men  in  all  the  railways  to  quit 
work  at  the  same  time,  a  condition  so  improbable  as  to 
question  the  propriety  of  any  recommendation  based 
upon  it.2 

In  place  of  strikes  the  brotherhoods  have  given 
their  full  indorsement  to  arbitration  of  disputes.  The 
managers  and  the  unions  in  the  latter  years  have  made, 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         37 

as  well,  numerous  wage  agreements  without  resort  to 
the  court  of  arbitration  or  to  strikes. 

The  Erdman  Act,  the  federal  statute  which  provided 
for  voluntary  arbitration  or  mediation  in  disputes  be- 
tween railroad  managers  and  their  employees  until 
1913,  was  enacted  in  1898.  During  the  eight  years 
that  followed,  the  law  was  invoked  in  one  dispute  only. 
From  1908  until  1912  it  was  appealed  to  sixty  times. 
Within  a  period  of  five  years  application  was  made  ac- 
cording to  the  provisions  of  the  law  under  federal 
arbitration  or  mediation,  by  the  railroads  nineteen 
times,  by  the  unions  thirteen  times,  and  sixteen  times 
joint  application  was  made  by  managers  and  union 
officers. 

In  1912  it  was  officially  reported: 

During  the  period  covered  by  the  practical  operation 
of  this  law  there  have  been  hundreds  of  cases  in  which 
either  new  agreements  have  been  negotiated  or  existing 
agreements  reopened  and  wage  scales  and  working  con- 
ditions readjusted  through  conferences  between  the  par- 
ticular road  involved  and  one  or  another  of  the  classes 
of  employees  covered  by  the  provisions  of  the  Erdman 
Act.  On  the  average  it  is  probable  that  hardly  a  week 
goes  by  in  which  some  one  of  these  classes  of  employees 
is  not  engaged  in  negotiations  with  some  railroad  in 
some  part  of  the  United  States  concerning  changes  in 
their  existing  agreements.  A  large  number  of  these  are 
settled  directly  without  the  intervention  of  any  of  the 
national  officials  of  the  organization  concerned.  .  .  . 3 

The  Erdman  Act  provided  that  its  machinery  should 
not  be  set  in  motion  until  a  strike  had  occurred,  or 


38  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  stoppage  of  work  was  seriously  threatened.  It 
was  for  the  purpose  of  proving  that  the  stoppage  of 
work  was  seriously  threatened,  or,  rather,  to  start  up 
arbitration  proceedings,  that  the  strike  vote  was  taken. 
The  fact  that  the  men  voted  to  strike  placed  the  officers 
in  a  better  position  during  arbitration  proceedings. 
There  was  throughout  the  proceedings  the  possibility 
of  a  strike  in  case  of  failure  to  agree.  On  the  other 
hand,  the  well-known  conservatism  of  the  organiza- 
tions, and  the  well-known  objection  of  the  officers  to 
calling  the  men  out  on  strike,  together  with  the  prece- 
dent against  striking  which  has  been  established,  gave 
the  managers  of  the  roads  a  sense  of  security  when 
withholding  the  concessions  demanded  by  the  union.* 
For  many  years  each  one  of  the  brotherhoods  made 
wage  agreements  with  single  systems  or  divisions  of  a 
system  or  even  with  a  single  superintendent.  Gradu- 
ally the  brotherhoods  formed  local  and  joint  protec- 
tive boards,  made  up  of  representatives  of  their  local 
lodges  and  divisions.  Later,  these  protective  boards 
included  the  lodges  of  a  brotherhood  throughout  a 
system  or  related  systems.  At  last,  these  joint  protec- 
tive boards  were  federated,  and  jointly  worked  out 
uniform  wage  scales  and  conditions  for  the  class  of 
workers  which  came  under  their  jurisdiction  within 
their  own  territory.  Up  to  this  point  collective  bar- 
gaining had  developed   from  agreements  with  single 

*  For  fuller  information  on  the  Erdman  Act  and  its  amend- 
ment in  1913,  see  Chapter  on  Arbitration. 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         39 

superintendents  of  road  divisions  for  one  class  of 
servants,  like  the  engineers,  to  bargaining  for  the 
same  class  within  a  territory  which  covered 
a  third  of  the  country  and  the  roads  operating 
within  it.  The  three  territorial  divisions  are  the  West 
ern,  the  Eastern,  and  the  Southern.  The  Western  Ter- 
ritory includes  the  Illinois  Central  and  all  lines  lying 
west  of  that  road  and  of  the  western  shore  of  Lake 
Michigan.  The  Eastern  Territory  includes  the  roads 
north  of  the  Chesapeake  and  Ohio  Railway  and  east 
of  the  Illinois  Central  and  Lake  Michigan.  The  South- 
ern Territory  covers  the  roads  south  of  the  Chesapeake 
and  Ohio  and  east  of  the  Illinois  Central. 

The  Western  Territory  was  organized  in  190 1,  and 
the  first  concerted  movement  was  made  by  the  Con- 
ductors and  Trainmen  jointly  in  1902.  Four  years 
later  the  second  territorial  movement  was  made  by  the 
Engineers,  and  the  following  year  the  third  movement 
was  made  by  the  Firemen,  all  in  the  Western  Terri- 
tory. 

Concerted  movements  were  opposed  in  the  Eastern 
Territory  long  after  they  were  accepted  by  the  man- 
agers of  systems  in  the  Western.  It  was  not  until  1910 
that  the  Eastern  managers  would  consent  to  a  joint 
consideration  of  wage  conditions.  The  Conductors, 
again  jointly  with  the  Trainmen,  made  the  first  suc- 
cessful attempt  to  secure  concerted  action  in  the  East- 
ern Territory.  And,  as  in  the  Western,  the  Engineers 
followed  the  movement  two  years  later  of  the  Con- 


4o  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ductors  and  Trainmen,  and  the  Firemen,  the  succeeding 
year,  followed  the  movement  of  the  Engineers. 

These  movements  of  the  brotherhoods  for  concerted 
action  within  a  territory  are  still  resisted  by  the  man- 
agers of  the  Eastern  and  Southern  roads.  But  in  the 
Western  Territory  a  single  movement  settles  wage 
conditions  as  they  are  initiated  singly  or  jointly  by 
the  brotherhoods. 

The  chief  purpose  of  the  territorial  movement  is  to 
standardize  wage  rates  and  all  other  wage  conditions. 
Warren  S.  Stone,  during  the  session  of  the  arbitration 
court  in  the  case  of  the  Eastern  firemen,  in  19 13,  de- 
clared that  the  Western  managers  like  many  associa- 
tions of  employers  preferred  conferring  with  their 
men  jointly  for  the  fixing  of  uniform  wage  condi- 
tions. The  recommendations  of  the  Engineers'  arbi- 
tration board  the  year  previous,  it  will  be  remembered, 
was  an  indorsement  of  Mr.  Stone's  position  in  its 
recommendations  for  uniformity  in  wage  rates  for 
railroad  employees.  But  the  majority  report,  made  by 
the  representatives  of  the  roads  and  the  representa- 
tives of  the  public,  objected  to  the  fixing  of  those  rates 
by  collective  bargaining.  If  wages  were  to  be  fixed 
they  proposed  that  they  should  be  fixed  by  a  Federal 
board,  as  railroad  rates  are  fixed  by  a  Federal  com- 
mission. As  this  proposition  excluded  the  voice  of 
the  workers  from  the  settlement  of  their  terms  of 
work,  the  representative  of  the  Engineers  filed  his 
minority  report. 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         41 

The  merging  of  railroads  and  railroad  systems  has 
made  uniformity  of  wage  rates  inevitable  over  large 
systems.  It  was  impossible  for  the  brotherhoods  to 
standardize  wages  over  a  territory  or  territories  and 
to  increase  rates  without  concerted  action  within 
their  organizations.  There  is  a  change  in  public 
opinion,  moreover,  in  regard  to  unrestricted  competi- 
tion in  railroad  affairs.  The  Engineers'  arbitration 
court  of  1912  gave  as  its  opinion  that  in  fixing  wage 
rates  the  wages  paid  by  meanly-managed  roads  should 
not  be  considered,  but  the  prevailing  wage  rate  of  a 
locality  or  of  the  most  successfully  managed  roads 
should  determine  decisions.  The  same  court  discov- 
ered that  in  the  Eastern  Territory  six  systems  owned 
or  controlled  seventy-nine  per  cent,  of  the  fifty-two 
systems  in  the  territory. 

How  the  organization  of  railroad  management  is 
conducive  to  standardization  of  working  conditions 
has  been  well  stated  by  John  R.  Commons.  He  says 
that  the  railroad  brotherhoods 

deal  with  corporations  conducted  like  governments. 
Their  scale  of  wages  is  like  a  legislative  enactment  fixing 
a  uniform  rate  of  pay  for  government  employees  over  a 
vast  area.  The  scale  is  issued  as  a  general  order  from 
the  highest  authority  to  all  subordinates  who  hire  and 
discharge  these  classes  of  employees.  The  positions 
themselves  are  well  defined,  there  is  but  one  man,  and 
no  chance  to  divide  up  his  work  among  a  set  of  helpers. 
The  superintendent  is  not  expected  to  pay  less  or  to  pay 
more,  nor  to  change  his  force  in  order  to  get  cheaper 


42  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

help.  Years  of  experience  have  shown  the  railway 
brotherhoods  that  they  can  rely  upon  a  promise  so  far 
removed  as  this  one  is  from  the  ordinary  treatment  of 
labor  as  a  commodity  fluctuating  upon  demand  and 
supply.  * 

While  the  concerted  action  of  local  lodges  of  each 
of  the  brotherhoods  was  developing  the  standardiza- 
tion of  wage  conditions,  another  movement  of  greater 
significance  from  the  point  of  view  of  labor  organiza- 
tion was  being  advanced.  This  was  the  federation 
of  the  brotherhoods  for  purposes  of  further  developing 
collective  bargaining. 

With  scrupulous  care  the  brotherhoods  had  made 
it  clear,  so  far  as  action  was  concerned,  that  they 
were  not  in  sympathy  with  the  labor  movement  as 
such,  and  that  class  action  was  not  a  part  of  their 
program.  They  not  only  refrained  from  alliances 
with  the  unions  of  the  American  Federation,  but  they 
carried  on  their  bargaining  with  their  superior  officers 
independently  of  each  other.  They  forbade  their 
members  to  strike  in  sympathy  with  the  members  of 
the  other  brotherhoods. 

In  1903  a  "  Plan  of  System  Federation "  was 
adopted  and  the  position  of  complete  craft  independ- 
ence was  officially  compromised  by  the  brotherhoods 
of  railroad  workers.  In  spite  of  the  well-defined 
policy  of  the  organizations,  sympathetic  or  joint 
strikes  of  the  members  of  the  different  railroad  crafts 
had  occurred,  but  with  the  growth  and  discipline  of 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         43 

the  organizations  they  had  become  less  and  less  fre- 
quent. 

The  Brotherhoods  of  Trainmen  and  Conductors 
were  the  first  to  break  away  from  the  position  of  com- 
plete independence  and  work  together  in  the  making 
and  adjusting  of  contracts.  But  the  Engineers  and 
Firemen  continued  the  original  policy  of  independ- 
ence until  1913,  or  ten  years  after  the  plan  of  fed- 
eration had  been  formulated.  There  has  been  in- 
evitable friction  between  two  organizations  represent- 
ing men  so  closely  related  as  the  firemen  and  the  engi- 
neers, between  the  man  who  runs  the  engine  and  the 
one  who  fires  it.  A  fireman  from  the  day  he  starts 
firing  is  in  the  process  of  becoming  an  engineer,  for 
without  his  experience  of  firing  he  may  not  qualify 
for  engineering.  When  he  does  qualify  he  may 
have  to  continue  as  fireman  until  a  position  of  engi- 
neer is  opened  to  him.  In  consequence,  many  en- 
gineers are  members  of  the  Brotherhoods  of  Firemen. 
Before  the  federation  agreement  between  the  Firemen 
and  Engineers  was  adopted  the  Brotherhood  of  Engi- 
neers negotiated  new  wage  conditions  for  all 
engineers  irrespective  of  their  union  affiliation.  Each 
of  the  organizations  enforced  the  terms  of  the  wage 
contracts  for  their  own  members.  Under  the  new 
arrangement  either  organization  may  negotiate  new 
schedules  or  they  may  be  negotiated  jointly.  The 
new  agreement  recommends  the  making  of  joint 
schedules  and  joint  negotiation  whenever  possible. 


44  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  "  Plan  of  System  Federation,"  as  amended  in 
1910,  provides  that  any  of  the  four  brotherhoods 
"  may  federate  for  the  purpose  of  adjusting  any 
complaint  which  may  be  presented  in  accordance  with 
the  laws  of  the  organization  aggrieved."  It  permits 
the  federated  organizations  to  cooperate  but  not 
federate  with  any  other  organization  of  railway  em- 
ployees. Under  safeguards  a  vote  of  the  federated 
organization  to  support  a  grievance  of  one  of  the 
organizations  may  be  taken  and  a  strike  inaugurated. 
If  any  one  of  the  federated  organizations  votes  not  to 
strike  the  other  organizations  may  proceed  without  it. 

The  more  recent  agreement  between  the  Engineers 
and  Firemen  specifies: 

In  case  either  organization  shall  make  an  issue  and 
declare  a  strike  independent  of  the  other  organization, 
whether  there  is  a  joint  working  agreement  or  not  be- 
tween the  committees,  the  organization  making  the  issue 
will  not  order  a  strike  of  its  members  who  are  working 
under  an  agreement  made  by  the  other  organization,  and 
it  shall  be  understood  that  should  the  Brotherhood  of 
Locomotive  Engineers  order  a  strike,  it  will  not  require 
its  members  who  are  firing  to  quit  their  positions  as  fire- 
men, and  if  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Firemen 
and  Enginemen  shall  order  a  strike  it  will  not  require 
its  members  who  are  running  engines  to  quit  their  posi- 
tions as  engineers.5 

It  further  provides  on  the  question  of  strikes  that : 

When  a  strike  is  called  by  one  organization  the 
members  of  the  other  organization  shall  not  perform  any 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         45 

service  that  was  being  performed  before  the  strike  was 
called  by  the  members  of  the  organization  who  are  on 
strike.5 

In  other  words,  this  agreement  makes  it  clear  that 
while  no  member  of  one  organization  may  take  the 
place  of  a  member  of  another  which  is  on  strike,  a 
fireman  shall  fire  an  engine  if  the  Firemen  are  not 
striking  on  their  own  account  even  if  the  Engineers 
are  on  strike  and  the  engine  is  being  run  by  a  non- 
union and  strike-breaking  engineer.  In  the  same  way 
an  engineer  shall  not  regard  the  fact  that  a  strike- 
breaking fireman  is  firing  his  engine. 

The  contract  between  the  Engineers  and  the  Fire- 
men, the  plan  for  the  federation  of  the  four  crafts, 
and  the  concerted  action  within  the  three  territories 
are  all  for  the  single  purpose  of  perfecting  con- 
tractual relations  between  the  management  of  the 
roads  and  the  men.  They  do  not  indicate  a  develop- 
ment of  class-conscious  action  as  understood  by  the 
radical  labor  unions.  But  they  are  a  recognition, 
born  of  experience,  of  the  interdependence  of  related 
crafts.  The  brotherhoods  have  not  adopted  any  of 
the  usual  labor  union  methods  which  are  particularly 
condemned  by  the  employing  class.  They  have  not 
stood  for  the  union  shop,  or  the  boycott,  of  the 
American  Federation.  The  value  of  the  insurance 
features  of  the  brotherhoods  to  all  railroad  men, 
and    the    fact    that    the    methods   of    road    manage- 


46  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ments  secure  for  all  the  employees  universal  condi- 
tions, make  the  union  shop  regulation  unneces- 
sary. 

On  the  question  of  picketing,  the  president  of  the 
Brotherhood  of  Trainmen  instructed  the  members  of 
the  union  that  the  order  to  strike  according  to  the 
rules  of  the  Order,  means  that  members  "  will  be 
expected  to  cease  work  at  a  given  time  and  to 
peacefully  and  quietly  depart  from  the  company's 
property,  and  remain  away  from  such  property  until 
the  strike  is  settled  or  until  you  receive  instructions 
from  your  general  committee  to  return  to  service 
...  if  the  railroad  companies  are  able  to  secure 
the  service  of  a  sufficient  number  of  men  to  operate 
their  property  we  must  concede  they  have  a  right  to 
do  so."  6 

With  the  features  which  are  particularly  irritating 
to  employers  removed,  with  the  concerted  movement 
well  developed  in  three  territories  covering  the  rail- 
road systems  of  the  country,  with  arbitration  well 
established,  the  brotherhoods  are  fully  prepared  on 
their  part  to  test  out  collective  bargaining  on  a  peace 
basis.  The  fact  that  railroad  management  is  highly 
centralized  is  an  important  element  in  the  scheme  of 
the  brotherhoods  for  the  peaceful  settlements  of 
wage  conditions  through  trade  agreements  made  and 
administered  on  terms  of  business  consolidation. 
There  are  no  present  indications  that  the  brotherhoods 


THE  RAILROAD  BROTHERHOODS         47 

have  other  intentions  or  are  to  be  counted  on   for 
sympathetic  action  in  the  general  labor  movement.* 

*  Since  the  above  was  written  officers  of  the  brotherhoods 
sustained  members  in  their  refusal  to  transport  the  militia  into 
the  strike  zone  of  the  coal  miners  of   Colorado. 


CHAPTER  IV 
INDUSTRIAL   WORKERS    OF   THE   WORLD 

Its  inception — Preamble — Relation  to  Socialism,  to  Syndicalism — 
Criticism  of  trade  unions — No  contract  with  capital — Direct 
action  vs.  political — War  on  the  trade  unions — Organiza- 
tion features  realized  and  planned  for — Centralization  of 
power — Membership — Its  present  position. 

Interest  in  a  well-established  organization  centers 
around  what  it  is  doing  and  what  it  has  accomplished. 
Interest  in  a  new  organization  centers  chiefly  around 
what  it  is  doing,  in  the  light  of  what  it  proposes  to 
do;  and  how  it  differs  from  other  organizations  in 
the  same  field,  and  its  relation  to  them. 

The  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  proclaimed 
that  its  coming  was  due  to  the  failure  of  existing 
labor  unions — the  failure  in  the  methods  adopted,  as 
well  as  failure  in  conception  of  the  ultimate  purpose 
of  the  labor  movement. 

The  new  organization  was  called  into  existence  by 
a  manifesto  issued  in  January,  1905,  which  con- 
cluded its  survey  of  an  outworn  industrial  system 
with  a  statement  of  the  failure  of  trade  unionism, 
and  the  task  which  a  new  organization  must  ac- 
complish : 

48 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      49 

The  employers'  line  of  battle  and  methods  of  war- 
fare correspond  to  the  solidarity  of  the  mechanical  and 
industrial  concentration,  while  laborers  still  form  their 
fighting  organizations  on  lines  of  long-gone  trade  divi- 
sions. The  battles  of  the  past  emphasize  this  lesson. 
The  textile  workers  of  Lowell,  Philadelphia  and  Fall 
River;  the  butchers  of  Chicago,  weakened  by  the  dis- 
integrating effects  of  trade  divisions ;  the  machinists  on 
the  Santa  Fe,  unsupported  by  their  fellow  workers  sub- 
ject to  the  same  masters;  the  long-struggling  miners  of 
Colorado  hampered  by  lack  of  unity  and  solidarity  upon 
the  industrial  battlefield,  all  bear  witness  to  the  helpless- 
ness and  impotency  of  labor  as  at  present  organized. 
This  worn-out  and  corrupt  system  offers  no  promise 
of  improvement  and  adaptation.  There  is  no  silver  lin- 
ing to  the  clouds  of  darkness  and  despair  settling  down 
upon  the  world  of  labor.  This  system  offers  only  a  per- 
petual struggle  for  slight  relief  from  wage  slavery.  It 
is  blind  to  the  possibility  of  establishing  an  industrial 
democracy,  wherein  there  shall  be  no  wage  slavery,  but 
where  the  workers  will  own  the  tools  which  they  operate 
and  the  product  of  which  they  alone  should  enjoy.  l 

The  last  sentence  marks  off  the  ultimate  purpose 
of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  from  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  and  the  Railway 
Brotherhoods,  which  are  not  concerned  with  the  dis- 
possessing of  capital,  but  with  maintaining  contracts 
advantageous  to  labor. 

The  preamble  to  the  constitution  further  elucidates 
the  revolutionary  purposes  which  characterize  and 
distinguish  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World 
among  the  labor  organizations  of  America : 


50  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  working  class  and  the  employing  class  have 
nothing  in  common.  There  can  be  no  peace  so  long  as 
hunger  and  want  are  found  among  millions  of  the  work- 
ing people,  and  the  few,  who  make  up  the  employing 
class,  have  all  the  good  things  of  life.  Between  these 
two  classes  a  struggle  must  go  on  until  the  workers 
of  the  world  organize  as  a  class,  take  possession  of  the 
earth  and  the  machinery  of  production,  and  abolish  the 
wage  system.  We  find  that  the  centering  of  the  manage- 
ment of  industries  into  fewer  and  fewer  hands  makes 
the  trade  unions  unable  to  cope  with  the  ever-growing 
power  of  the  employing  class.  The  trade  unions  foster 
a  state  of  affairs  which  allows  one  set  of  workers  to  be 
pitted  against  another  set  of  workers  in  the  same  indus- 
try, thereby  helping  to  defeat  one  another  in  wage 
wars.  Moreover,  the  trade  unions  aid  the  employing 
class  to  mislead  the  workers  into  the  belief  that  the 
working  class  have  interests  in  common  with  their  em- 
ployers. 

These  conditions  can  be  changed  and  the  interest  of 
the  working  class  upheld  only  by  an  organization  formed 
in  such  a  way  that  all  its  members  in  any  one  industry, 
or  in  all  industries  if  necessary,  cease  work  whenever  a 
strike  or  lockout  is  on  in  any  department  thereof,  thus 
making  an  injury  to  one  an  injury  to  all. 

Instead  of  the  conservative  motto,  "  a  fair  day's  wage 
for  a  fair  day's  work,"  we  must  inscribe  on  our  banner 
the  revolutionary  watchword,  "  abolition  of  the  wage 
system." 

It  is  the  historic  mission  of  the  working  class  to  do 
away  with  capitalism.  The  army  of  production  must  be 
organized,  not  only  for  the  every-day  struggle  with 
capitalists,  but  also  to  carry  on  production  when  capital- 
ism shall  have  been  overthrown.  By  organizing  indus- 
trially we  are  forming  the  structure  of  the  new  society 
within  the  shell  of  the  old. 2 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      51 

There  is  nothing  in  the  preamble  or  manifesto 
which  does  not  conform  to  Socialist  doctrines,  or  to 
which  the  International  Socialist  movement  might 
not  subscribe.  It  is  the  interpretation  of  the  preamble 
by  individual  members  of  the  organization  which 
has  attached  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World 
to  the  Syndicalist  rather  than  to  the  Socialist  move- 
ment. 

The  declaration  in  the  manifesto  that  the  workers 
should  own  and  operate  their  own  tools,  and  that 
they  alone  should  enjoy  the  fruits  of  their  labor, 
would  mean,  according  to  American  Socialists,  that 
all  workers,  through  a  political  state,  or  regulated 
by  it,  would  operate,  own,  and  enjoy  collectively  all 
tools  and  the  product  of  industry. 

Moreover,  Socialists  who  are  not  bureaucrats  see 
in  the  labor  unions  the  future  administrative  units  of 
industrial  democracy.  With  this  point  of  view,  they 
can  subscribe  to  the  section  of  the  preamble  which 
reads,  "  by  organizing  industrially  we  are  forming 
the  structure  of  the  new  society  within  the  shell  of 
the  old."  But  this  sentence,  interpreted  by  the  lead- 
ers of  the  Industrial  Workers,  is  directly  opposed  to 
the  political  Socialism  of  America.  It  is  the  declara- 
tion of  the  Syndicalists  that  the  new  social  order  will 
not  be  dependent  on  political  action  or  a  political 
state,  but  it  will  be  an  industrial  commonwealth  in 
which  all  governmental  functions  as  we  know  them 
to-day  will  have  ceased  to  exist,  and  in  which  each 


52  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

industry  will  be  controlled  by  the  workers  in  it  with- 
out external  interference. 

But  whether  the  workers  are  Syndicalists  or  Social- 
ists is  less  important  to  the  Industrial  Workers  of 
the  World  than  is  usually  supposed.  What  the  work- 
ers actually  believe  in  regard  to  the  future,  the  In- 
dustrial Workers  of  the  World  considers  of  less 
importance  than  what  they  accept  as  true  or  reject 
as  false  in  their  own  present  relations  to  their  work 
and  fellow  workers.  The  Syndicalist  theory  that 
each  group  of  workers  shall  control  the  industry  in 
which  they  work,  is  simpler  in  form  and  easier  to 
grasp  than  the  idea  of  social  ownership  of  all  pro- 
duction politically  managed.  The  point  the  Indus- 
trial Workers  is  keen  about  making  is  that  wealth 
belongs  to  labor. 

To  organized  labor  it  is  also  unimportant  whether 
the  Industrial  Workers'  philosophy  is  Syndicalist  or 
Socialist,  or  even  whether  it  is  sound  or  unsound  in 
its  details  of  a  future  state.  It  is  unimportant  except 
as  it  serves  agitation  purposes.  Whatever  weakness 
or  strength  is  inherent  in  the  philosophy  is  for  the 
time  being  of  interest  to  theorists  rather  than  to  labor 
organizations  in  active  operation  from  day  to  day. 

The  use  of  the  Syndicalist  theory  is  part  of  the 
I  avowed  purpose  of  the  Industrial  Workers  to  force 
the  labor  movement  to  accept  the  doctrine  of  the  class 
struggle — to  acknowledge  the  irreconcilable  conflict 
between   capital   and   labor.      The   organization   pro- 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      53 

poses  to  carry  these  doctrines  through  an  aggressive 
and  militant  campaign  into  the  ranks  of  the  workers 
without  property  and  without  skill.  Of  the  forms 
of  organization  chosen  by  the  Industrial  Workers  for 
accomplishing  its  purpose  and  waging  its  warfare, 
the  first  in  importance  is  the  substitution  of  indus- 
trial for  craft  unionism.  An  official  statement  from 
the  secretary  of  the  organization  says: 

The  craft  plan  of  organization  is  a  relic  of  an  obso- 
lete stage  in  the  evolution  of  capitalist  production.  At 
the  time  of  its  inception  it  corresponded  to  the  develop- 
ment of  the  period ;  the  productive  worker  in  a  given 
industry  took  the  new  raw  material,  and  with  the  tools 
of  the  trade  or  craft,  completed  the  product  of  that  in- 
dustry, performing  every  necessary  operation  himself. 
As  a  result  the  workers  combined  in  organizations  the 
lines  of  which  were  governed  by  the  tools  that  they 
used.  At  that  period  this  was  organization.  To-day,  in 
view  of  the  specialization  of  the  processes  of  production, 
the  invention  of  machinery,  and  the  concentration  of 
ownership,  it  is  no  longer  organization  but  division. 
And  division  on  the  economic  field  for  the  worker  spells 
defeat  and  degradation. 3 

The  Industrial  Workers  set  itself  the  task  of  gath- 
ering together  the  workers  of  the  separate  trades  of 
an  industry,  the  workers  of  the  branches  of  an  in- 
dustry, and  at  last  all  the  workers  of  all  branches 
of  all  the  industries  into  what  it  calls  "  One  Big 
Union." 

For  the  purpose  of  sympathetic  action,  the  Indus- 
trial Workers  proposes  to  abolish  all  forms  of  labor 


54  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

union  contract  with  capital,  to  introduce  low  dues 
and  low  initiation  fees  in  place  of  the  high  dues  and 
initiation  fees  of  certain  trade  unions;  the  short 
strike  followed  by  the  use  of  sabotage  on  the  return 
to  work  after  a  lost  strike,  and  the  education  of  the 
workers  to  reliance  on  direct  action  rather  than  po- 
litical or  delegated  action. 

The  opposition  of  the  Industrial  Workers  to  the 
contract  between  labor  unions  and  capital  follows  the 
dogma  of  the  irreconcilable  interests  of  the  contract- 
ing parties.  But  contracts  are  opposed  on  practical 
grounds  as  well.  The  Industrial  Workers  points  out 
that  it  is  a  cut-throat  policy,  disastrous  to  labor  as  a 
whole,  to  permit  one  group  of  workers  to  tie  them- 
selves to  capital  in  a  determinate  or  indeterminate 
contract,  and  because  of  the  contract  to  remain  at 
work  if  another  group  in  a  related  trade  strikes  and 
needs  the  help  of  the  tied-up  group  to  win  its  fight. 
The  Industrial  Workers  states  that  there  is  only  one 
contract  that  workers  in  all  honesty  can  make, — the 
contract  to  stand  by  a  fellow  worker. 

The  Industrial  Workers  opposes  the  limitation  to 
union  membership  which  is  created  by  the  trade 
unions  through  their  practice  of  imposing  high  dues 
and  initiation  fees.  It  opposes  it  on  the  ground  that 
it  creates  an  aristocracy  of  labor  and  is  in  its  es- 
sence the  denial  of  fraternity;  that  the  gains  of  the 
few  are  bought  at  the  sacrifice  of  the  many;  that  it 
destroys   the  spirit   of   unification   of   all   labor   and 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      55 

defeats  the  ultimate  purpose  of  the  revolutionary 
labor  movement.  The  low  dues  offer  no  opportunity 
for  the  development  of  a  war  treasury  and  the  In- 
dustrial Workers  has  no  substitute  plan  for  financing 
strikes.  The  supposition  is  that  strikes  will  be  short 
and  the  revolutionary  spirit  of  the  workers  will  carry 
them  through  the  privations  of  strike  periods.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  up  to  date,  the  revolutionary  spirit 
of  the  strikers  has  called  forth  large  financial  con- 
tributions from  Socialists,  labor  unions,  and  other 
sympathizers.  But  these  sources  of  help  are  uncer- 
tain and  cannot  be  depended  on  for  long  or  frequent 
periods. 

While  the  Industrial  Workers  in  theory  stands  for 
the  short  strike,  the  leaders  have  not  found  them- 
selves able  to  accomplish  it.  They  have  found,  what 
all  labor  leaders  know,  that  when  workers  strike,  it 
is  not  for  revolutionary  reasons,  but  against  some 
definite  imposition,  or  for  some  gain,  some  specific 
gain,  intensely  desired.  Strikers  are  out  to  win  their 
particular  point.  The  men  or  women  who  are  ready 
for  a  quick  termination  of  the  strike,  are  the  most 
conservative,  those  who  most  fear  the  power  of 
capital,  those  with  the  least  rebellion  in  their  hearts. 
The  braver  spirits  on  whom  the  leaders  count  to  sup- 
port their  revolutionary  program,  are  those  who  will 
not  surrender,  even  for  the  sake  of  the  future,  their 
particular  fight  with  their  particular  boss.  The  work- 
ers have  not  adopted  the  short  strike  program  of  the 


56  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Industrial  Workers  or  the  suggestion  that  they  carry 
their  fight  back  into  the  shop  by  the  use  of  sabotage 
methods.  The  leaders  look  forward  to  a  gradual 
realization  among  the  workers  of  the  advantage  of 
the  short  strike  and  its  adoption  as  its  value  is  under- 
stood. 

The  Industrial  Workers,  concerned  primarily  with 
the  organization  of  the  unskilled  worker,  claims  that 
direct  action,  that  is,  labor  union  action,  is  superior 
to  political  action,  in  the  war  against  capital.  Its 
reasons  are  that  many  thousands  of  workers  are 
foreign  born ;  that  many  more  are  in  migratory  occu- 
pations, and  cannot  use  the  ballot;  that  the  political 
state  is  owned  by  capital  and  the  strongest  position 
for  labor  is  to  attack,  not  the  owned  or  controlled 
state,  but  the  "  ascendent  "  state,  which  is  industry. 
Direct  action,  or  labor  union  action,  gives  the  in- 
dividual worker  greater  opportunities  for  initiative, 
for  it  is  more  possible  for  the  individual  worker  to 
follow  and  to  understand,  and  therefore  control,  the 
action  of  the  officers  of  a  union  than  of  a  state.  The 
members  of  the  Industrial  Workers  differ  in  their 
attitude  toward  political  action.  Some  reject  it  en- 
tirely, and  some  give  it  second  place  to  labor  union 
action.  At  a  meeting  in  New  York  City  of  a  branch 
of  the  Socialist  Party,  held  in  October,  1913,  William 
D.  Haywood  said,  "  I  advocate  the  industrial  ballot 
alone  when  I  address  the  workers  in  the  textile  in- 
dustries  of   the    East    where   a   great    majority   are 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      57 

foreigners  without  political  representation.  But 
when  I  speak  to  American  workingmen  in  the  West 
I  advocate  both  the  industrial  and  the  political 
ballot." 

It  is  only  necessary  to  read  the  official  literature 
of  the  Industrial  Workers  to  realize  that  its  advent 
was  as  much  a  declaration  of  war  on  the  existing 
labor  unions  as  a  signal  to  capital.  The  avowed  pur- 
pose was  to  supersede  all  other  labor  unions  with 
their  "  out-of-date  methods."  Much  of  the  early 
work  was  carried  on  in  trades  and  territories  where 
organization  existed  to  some  extent  and  was  under 
the  control  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 
In  declaring  war  on  the  trade  unions,  it  created  for 
itself  a  position  in  the  labor  movement  which  the 
Syndicalists  of  England  and  France  had  avoided.  The 
Industrial  Workers  defends  its  position  of  attack  on 
the  ground  that  the  American  Federation  has  com- 
mitted its  organizations  "  to  safeguarding  the  em- 
ployers' interests  as  well  as  the  interests  of  their 
membership,  a  program  of  harmonizing  that  which 
cannot  be  harmonized.  .  .  .  Such  a  program  betrays 
them  into  the  hands  of  their  opponents,  for  it  sets  the 
seal  of  their  own  organization's  approval  upon  their 
condition  of  servitude."  4 

The  Industrial  Workers  considers  that  the  efforts 
of  labor  union  officials  to  deal  with  capital  are  in- 
evitably stultifying;  that  the  spirit  of  compromise, 
an  intrinsic  part   of   bargaining,   gradually  modifies 


58  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

their  point  of  view;  that  as  they  surrender  their  un- 
compromising labor  position,  they  become  blocks  in 
the  way  of  advance. 

There  are  probably  many  thousands  of  members  of 
the  American  Federation  who  indorse  the  tenets  of 
the  Industrial  Workers,  but  believe  that  the  American 
Federation  can  be  made  to  change  its  program,  and 
that  the  workers  who  wish  to  make  war  on  capital 
cannot  afford  to  waste  their  strength  in  forming  an 
opposition  organization.  They  believe  the  same  re- 
sults can  be  accomplished  by  "  permeating  "  existing 
organizations  with  the  revolutionary  spirit.  There 
are  also  active  American  Federation  men  who  think 
the  Industrial  Workers  as  a  separate  organization  will 
be  of  value  in  the  class  struggle  if  it  confines  itself  to 
fields  in  which  the  Federation  has  failed  or  has  not 
attempted  organization.  The  very  existence  of  the 
Industrial  Workers  makes  it  less  difficult  for  conserva- 
tive unions  to  contract  with  employers,  who  fear  the 
possibility  of  falling  into  the  hands  of  an  unmerciful 
organization. 

In  working  out  the  plans  for  a  new  organization, 
the  Industrial  Workers  was  partially  guided  by  a 
desire  to  avoid  what  it  considered  the  weaknesses  in 
structure  of  the  American  Federation.  It  was  par- 
ticularly bent  on  avoiding  the  autonomy  of  a  division. 
The  local  industrial  union  corresponds  to  the  local 
trade  union  but  has  more   freedom.     The  local  in- 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      59 

dustrial  union  includes  in  its  membership  all  the 
workers  in  an  industry  in  one  locality. 

The  Industrial  Workers  in  circumscribing  the 
power  of  the  national  union  pointed  out  the  restric- 
tions and  evils  which  result  from  the  autonomous 
rule  of  the  international  trade  unions;  the  suppres- 
sion of  membership  interest  and  control.  The  na- 
tional industrial  unions  are  given  control  over  the 
local  unions  in  matters  of  common  interest  to  the 
workers  in  the  industries  they  represent.  In  matters 
of  general  interest  and  welfare  to  workers  of  all 
industries  the  General  Executive  Board  of  the  In- 
dustrial Workers  directs  the  membership.  It  also 
provides  that  the  executive  board  shall  have  the  power 
to  call  strikes  in  any  division  of  the  organization  if 
in  the  opinion  of  the  board  any  subordinate  union  on 
strike  needs  the  help  of  any  other.  This  centraliza- 
tion of  power  is  the  organization's  effort  to  bring 
about  solidarity  in  the  whole  labor  group. 

The  national  industrial  unions  are  organized  when 
there  exists  in  an  industry  the  required  number  of 
local  industrial  unions,  with  the  required  minimum 
of  membership.  In  1913  the  existing  national  unions 
with  their  locals  were  reported  as  follows:  The  na- 
tional Industrial  Union  of  Textile  Workers,  with  37 
local  unions;  the  Forest  and  Lumber  Workers,  with 
48  local  unions;  the  Marine  and  Transport  Workers, 
with  12  local  unions.  There  were  also  95  local  unions 
for  which  there  are  no  corresponding  national  unions. 


60  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  plan  of  the  Industrial  Workers  includes  the 
formation  of  industrial  departments  in  which  shall 
be  affiliated  all  national  industrial  unions  of  kindred 
industries.  No  departments  at  the  present  time  exist. 
This  department  plan  provides  for:  (1)  A  Depart- 
ment of  Agriculture,  Land,  Fishery,  and  Water 
Products;  (2)  a  Department  of  Mining;  (3)  a  De- 
partment of  Transportation  and  Communication;  (4) 
a  Department  of  Manufacturing  and  General  Pro- 
duction; (5)  a  Department  of  Construction;  (6)  a 
Department  of  Public  Service. 

The  Industrial  District  Councils,  which  correspond 
to  the  city  central  unions  of  the  American  Federation, 
are  given  a  more  important  place  in  the  scheme  of 
the  organization  than  they  are  in  the  Federation.  In 
the  latter,  affiliation  is  optional  with  local  unions. 
The  local  industrial  unions  are  required  to  join  the 
District  Councils  of  the  Industrial  Workers.  The 
District  Councils,  moreover,  are  given  supervision 
over  the  work  of  organization  in  their  district.  They 
are  expected  to  employ  organizers  and  push  forward 
the  unionizing  of  workers  in  their  district  as  far  as  it 
is  possible  to  do. 

The  division  of  power  between  the  General  Execu- 
tive Board,  the  National  Industrial  Unions,  and  the 
District  Councils  is  regarded  as  an  important  depart- 
ure from  the  American  Federation  scheme,  which 
places  absolute  power  in  the  hands  of  the  interna- 
tional unions. 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      61 

The  question  of  "  centralization  or  decentraliza- 
tion "  has  been,  and  still  is,  a  burning  issue  among  the 
leaders  of  the  Industrial  Workers.  A  delegate  to 
the  second  convention  of  the  Industrial  Workers,  who 
was  largely  responsible  for  the  policy  of  limiting  the 
power  of  the  national  unions,  and  giving  the  general 
executive  a  controlling  hand  over  the  organization  as 
a  whole,  explained  his  position  at  that  time.    He  said : 

The  issue  is  not  to  build  up  a  czar,  but  the  issue  is 
to  prevent  the  establishment  of  petty  independencies  of 
petty  czars.  The  issue  that  presents  itself  before  us  is 
the  issue  that  the  government  of  these  United  States 
was  confronted  with  in  the  matter  of  states'  rights,  when 
every  state  presumed  to  go  it  independent  of  the  central 
administration.   .    .    . 

Quoting  from  the  constituton  of;  the  Industrial 
Workers,  he  said :   .    .    . 

The  subdivision  national  and  international  unions 
shall  have  autonomy  in  their  respective  internal  affairs, 
provided  the  general  executive  board  shall  have  power 
to  control  these  industrial  unions  in  matters  concerning 
the  interest  of  the  general  welfare.  .  .  .  He  con- 
tinued :  You  will  find  the  repeated  statement  ...  of 
William  D.  Haywood  that  this  is  to  be  a  government,  not 
of  departments,  but  of  the  rank  and  file.  .  .  .  He  joined 
in  the  view  which  I  have  stated,  that  the  departments, 
so-called,  must  be  in  the  nature  of  the  states  of  the 
United  States,  and  that  there  should  be  no  less  and  no 
more  autonomy  .  .  .  this  government  of  the  United 
States  is  not  a  government  of  states,  but  a  government 
of  the  people.    For  the  same  reason,  the  government  of 


62  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

this  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  is  not  a  govern- 
ment of  departments,  it  is  a  government  of  the  rank 
and  file.  Moreover,  if  you  turn  over  to  the  manifesto, 
along  the  lines  of  which  we  hewed  so  close,  and  allowed 
neither  extremists  nor  reactionists  to  cause  us  to  swerve, 
that  manifesto  clearly  speaks  about  the  autonomy  that 
should  prevail,  namely,  in  internal  matters  that  do  not 
concern  others,  and  it  refers  to  working  class  unity.  A 
working  class  unity  cannot  be  maintained  in  the  I.  W. 
W.  if  the  head  of  any  department  has  it  in  his  power  to 
exclude  from  the  rank  and  file  the  actions  of  the  Gen- 
eral Executive  Board  of  the  whole  body.  If  the  gov- 
ernor of  a  state  or  the  legislature  of  a  state  had  power  to 
keep  information  away  from  the  rank  and  file  of  the 
state  as  to  what  occurs,  you  can  imagine  what  would 
be  the  result.  And  that  was  just  what  was  wanted  by 
.  .  .  the  element  that  wanted  that  no  law  passed  by 
the  Congress  should  reach  the  rank  and  file,  unless  it 
went  through  the  state  authorities.  .  .  .  We  had  the 
nullification  turmoil,  we  had  Aaron  Burr,  who  attempted 
rebellion,  and  we  finally  had  the  conflict  that  put  an  end 
to  it.  Now  I  maintain  that  this  bourgeois  history  is  the 
pedestal  on  which  we  stand.  Revolution  does  not  mean 
to  break  off  with  the  past;  we  are  children  of  the  past, 
and  what  we  are  laboring  for  here  upon  the  industrial 
field,  the  bourgeois  capitalists  have  established  before 
us  upon  the  political  field,  the  political  field  dividing  us 
into  states,  the  industrial  field  proposing  to  remove  state 
distinctions  and  establishing  the  industries  on  a  newer 
basis.  .  .  .  The  actions  of  the  General  Executive 
Board  shall  be  brought  before  the  rank  and  file  of  each 
organization,  and  while  the  industrial  unions  must  have 
autonomy  in  their  private  affairs,  in  affairs  such  as  are 
properly  private  they  are  to  have  autonomy,  the 
autonomy  is  destroyed  absolutely  upon  matters  of  gen- 
eral concern.  .  .  . 5 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD      63 

The  General  Executive  Board  has  wielded,  in  the 
last  few  years,  greater  power  than  was  originally 
intended.  This  is  probably  due  to  outside  causes. 
The  Industrial  Workers,  instead  of  mapping  out  or- 
ganization and  following  well-laid-out  plans,  has  been 
plunged  into  convulsive  and  sudden  strikes  in  indus- 
tries and  districts  where  no  organization  existed. 

The  membership,  based  on  cards  issued,  is  120,000. 
The  paid-up  membership  in  1913  was  30,347.  The 
Secretary  reports  that 

the  membership  to-day  consists  almost  wholly  of  un- 
skilled workers.  The  bulk  of  the  present  membership 
is  in  the  following  industries :  Textile,  steel,  lumber, 
mining,  farming,  and  railroad  construction.  The  ma- 
jority of  the  workers  in  these  industries,  except  the  tex- 
tile, travel  from  place  to  place  following  the  different 
seasons  of  work.  They  are  therefore  out  of  touch  with 
the  organization  for  months  at  a  period.  6 

To-day  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  holds 
the  uncontested  place  of  friend  of  the  industrial  out- 
cast, the  unemployed,  and  the  unemployable.  The 
Socialist  Party  at  one  time  claimed  that  place,  and 
held  that  a  tramp  was  not  a  person  to  be  despised  be- 
cause he  was  a  tramp;  that  a  man  who  refused  to 
slave  under  capitalist  exploitation  deserves  respect. 
It  is  now  common  to  hear  the  Socialist  Party  members, 
with  malice  of  thought,  interpret  the  initials  I.  W.  W. 
as  "  I  won't  work." 

It  is  not  surprising  that  the  Industrial  Workers  of 


64  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  World,  at  the  end  of  its  eighth  year,  does  not 
report  a  highly  developed  organization.  It  chose 
as  its  field  the  hitherto  least  organizable  element  in 
industry.  It  made  its  appeal  and  its  plans  to  meet 
those  workers  who  were  the  least  able  to  give  it  per- 
manent support,  or  even  substantial  temporary  sup- 
port. Its  revolutionary  program  was  met  by  capital 
and  the  courts  with  unrelenting  opposition.  Its  at- 
tacks on  the  trade  union  movement  developed  factional 
disputes  among  the  workers.  Its  agitation  aroused 
workers  to  sudden  and  unexpected  revolt  in  various 
parts  of  the  country.  Its  free  speech  fights  brought 
it  into  conflicts  which  had  to  do  with  the  question  of 
individual  freedom  rather  than  with  labor  organiza- 
tion, although  they  were  the  preliminaries  of  labor 
organization.  It  is  impossible  to  predict  whether  it 
will  be  able  to  develop  its  organization,  or  realize 
the  outline  of  organization  it  has  before  it.  Its  record 
of  the  past  three  years,  1912  to  1914,  is  a  record  of 
a  national  force  rather  than  one  of  an  organization. 


CHAPTER  V 
ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN 

No  evidence  of  policy  of  union  discrimination — Lack  of  confi- 
dence in  her  executive  ability — Problem  is  not  discrimina- 
tion but  the  position  of  woman  and  attitude  toward  her — 
Relation  between  unskilled  and  women  workers — Her  do- 
mestic and  industrial  position  related — Women  not  interested 
in  permanent  organization — Women  good  strikers — Wom- 
en's Trade  Union  League. 

For  several  reasons  the  organization  of  women  wage- 
earners  is  a  subject  apart  from  the  organization  of 
workers  as  a  whole. 

There  are  no  figures  separating  the  membership  of 
unions  according  to  sex;  all  alike  are  wage-earners  in 
statistical  reports.  Although  there  are  unquestion- 
ably more  men  organized  than  women,  there  are  also 
more  men  than  women  in  the  more  organizable  trades. 
The  question  of  proportional  membership  of  men  and 
women  is  an  open  one.  It  is  hypothetical  to  state 
that  there  is  a  policy  of  discrimination  against  the 
unionizing  of  women.  The  American  Federation  of 
Labor  in  its  pledge  of  membership  requires  that  no 
discrimination  shall  be  made  on  account  of  sex,  creed, 
or  color  in  the  local  or  federal  unions  directly  de- 
pendent on  the  National  Executive  Council.  More- 
over, wherever  there  is  a  demand  on  the  Council  for 

65 


66  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  organization  of  these  unions  there  is  no  lack  of 
interest  or  effort  on  account  of  sex.  It  will  be  remem- 
bered that  the  home  rule  policy  of  the  Federation 
leaves  its  international  unions  free  to  organize  as 
they  elect  within  their  jurisdiction.  At  the  1913 
convention  of  the  Federation  a  per  capita  tax  of  one 
per  cent,  was  levied  as  a  special  assessment  to  defray 
a  campaign  for  the  organization  of  women. 

The  national  unions  of  the  American  Federation 
differ  in  their  attitude  toward  women,  but  it  is  prac- 
tically impossible  to  fasten  on  any  what  could  be 
considered  sex  discrimination  in  admittance  to  mem- 
bership. In  exceptional  instances  are  men  and  women 
engaged  in  doing  the  same  kind  of  work.  As  the 
national  unions  of  the  American  Federation  organize 
by  crafts  and  by  division  of  crafts,  and  as  these  crafts 
and  divisions  represent  a  branch  of  an  industry  in 
which  either  men  or  women  are  at  work,  proof  of 
discrimination  could  be  deduced  in  the  exceptional 
cases  only  where  men  and  women  are  doing  the  same 
kind  of  work  in  one  locality,  and  the  men  are  or- 
ganized and  the  women  are  not.  There  are  probably 
several  exceptional  instances,  like  the  organization  of 
cigar  packers.  Both  men  and  women  pack  cigars. 
The  men  cigar  packers  who  are  organized  in  New 
York  opposed  attempts  to  include  the  women  in  their 
local  union.  They  claimed  that  the  women  did 
inferior  work  and  that  their  scale  could  not  be 
raised  to  meet  union  requirements,  but  they  did  not 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  67 

prove  their  claims  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
women. 

It  is  not  unusual  to  find  that  a  national  union  has 
organized  one  craft  and  not  another,  although  it  has 
been  given  jurisdiction  over  both.  As  an  example : 
The  Hotel  and  Restaurant  Employees'  International 
Alliance  holds,  for  the  American  Federation,  juris- 
diction over  cooks,  waiters,  bartenders,  and  chamber- 
maids in  hotels,  restaurants,  and  saloons.  The  bar- 
tenders of  the  country  are  organized  out  of  all  pro- 
portion to  the  waiters.  The  bartenders  are  men,  and 
the  waiters  are  men  and  women.  It  is  not  clear 
whether  this  is  due  to  neglect  of  the  waiters,  or  to  the 
fact  that  the  officers  of  the  union  are  more  interested 
in  bartenders,  or  whether  they  have  found  bartenders 
less  difficult  to  organize. 

But  discrimination  against  women  as  members  of  a 
union  is  negligible.  Where  women  are  eager  to  or- 
ganize they  Hisualfy  find  it  possible  to  secure  the 
cooperation  of  the  union  representing  their  trade. 

The  discrimination  against  women  is  within  rather 
than  without  the  membership.  Women  are  discour- 
aged from  taking  an  active  part  in  the  executive 
affairs  of  organization.  There  are  no  women  among 
the  national  officers  or  the  national  executive  of  the 
American  Federation.  In  the  in  national  unions 
there  is  but  one  woman  president.  It  would  be  rare 
to  find  women  presiding  over  a  city  or  state  organi- 
zation. 


68  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

While  the  leaders  of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the 
World  show  confidence  in  the  part  women  have  taken 
and  will  take  in  the  industrial  struggle,  the  women  of 
Lawrence,  Mass.,  observed  that  the  officers  of  the 
local  organization  in  that  city  have  given  them  no 
better  opportunity  for  taking  part  in  the  administra- 
tion of  union  affairs  than  have  the  men  of  the  Ameri- 
can Federation. 

'  Labor  funioju  men  are  like  other  men :  they  are  not 
eager  to  trust  office-holding  to  women.  Labor  union 
women  are  like  other  women;  they  lack  the  courage 
and  determination  to  overcome  the  prevailing  attitude 
that  women  are  unfit  to  assume  executive  responsi- 
bility. It  is  the  lack  of  the  executive  representation 
of  women  rather  than  lack  of  membership  in  the, 
unions  that  endows  the  labor  movement  with  a  mascu- 
line point  of  view  and  limits  it  to  masculine  ability. 

I  The  real  problem  of  the  organization  of  women 
in  labor  unions  is  npt  discrimination,  but  the  position 
jof  women  in  their  domestic  relations  and  industry.! 
This  is  complicated  by  a  special  attitude  assumed 
toward  women,  of  which  their  attitude  toward  them- 
selves is  a  part. 

The  mass  of  wage-earning  women  are  in  trades  . 
which  yield  the  lowest  scale  of  ,wages,  where  little 
skill  is  required,  and  where  a  worker  can  be  quickly 
replaced  by  other  workers.  The  manufacturing  in- 
dustries in  which  women  work  are  subject  to  con- 
stant change,  to  change  in  seasons  of  work,  to  change 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  69 

in  new  methods  of  work,  to  change  through  the  in- 
troduction of  machinery,  to  change  in  nationality  and 
sudden  influxes  of  workers  from  other  countries. 

For  obvious  reasons,  men  as  well  as  women  work- 
ing under  conditions  as  unstable  as  they  are  unprofit- 
able are  far  less  interested  in  building  up  permanent 
organizations  than  are  workers  in  the  more  perma- 
nent trades;  in  the  trades  which  require  experience 
and  training,  and  which  pay  the  highest  wages. 

A  worker  with  training  or  skill  is  eager  to  protect 
his  special  kind  of  property.  The  American  Federa- 
tion form  of  organization  and  its  methods  have  an 
obvious  value  to  such  a  worker.  It  offers  him  a  de- 
fense against  attack  on  his  special  property.  It  is 
plainly  worth  the  while  of  such  a  worker  to  invest  in 
the  union  of  his  trade  or  industry  and  to  make 
immediate  sacrifices  for  the  protection  and  for  the 
rewards  for  which  the  permanent  form  of  organiza- 
tion stands.  It  is  also  possible  for  him  to  pay  union 
dues  out  of  his  comparatively  high  rate  of  wages  in 
amounts  sufficiently  large  to  insure  the  financing  of 
an  organization. 

On  the  other  hand,  it  is  extremely  difficult  to  per- 
suade workers  who  are  not  receiving  a  living  wage, 
or  who  are  casually  employed,  to  join  an  organiza- 
tion which  will  require  time,  money,  energy,  and 
many  serious  sacrifices  for  a  reward  in  the  future 
which  for  them  is  certain  only  in  its  uncertainties. 
Unlike  the  skilled  worker,  they  have  neither  the  mar- 


•jo  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

gin  out  of  which  to  pay  dues  nor  the  faith  in  the 
future.  To  the  workers  without  a  trade  future  the 
investment  in  a  union  is  a  speculative  proposition. 

This  is  the  problem  of  unionizing  the  unskilled 
worker,  and,  as  the  mass  of  women  are  unskilled,  it  is 
in  part  the  problem  of  the  organization  of  women. 

While  the  methods  of  the  American  Federation 
appeal  to  the  skilled  worker,  the  Industrial  Workers 
propose  to  offer  special  inducements  to  the  unskilled 
worker  by  limiting  dues  and  initiation  fees.  But 
placing  even  a  minimum  tax  on  the  unskilled  worker 
does  not  meet  the  uncertainties  of  casual  employment. 
The  Industrial  Workers  have  not  yet  shown,  it  may 
be  that  they  do  not  expect  to  show,  that  the  lowest 
paid  workers  can  be  interested  in  a  permanent  or- 
ganization. Their  provision  for  the  transfer  of  a 
worker  from  one  trade  or  one  industry  to  another 
is  a  recognition  of  the  uncertainties  of  the  casually 
employed.  But  it  is  too  early  in  its  history  to  judge 
whether  it  can  or  cannot  meet  organization  needs  on 
a  treasury  built  up  on  contributions  of  the  casual  work- 
ers. Its  large  strikes  have  been  largely  contributed 
to  by  other  labor  and  by  Socialist  organizations. 

One  important  phase  of  industrial  unionism,  which 
includes  the  lowest  paid  worker  and  the  highest  paid 
in  one  union,  is  this  question  of  financing  the  organi- 
zation of  the  former.  The  higher  dues  of  the  better 
paid  workers  might  keep  up  a  treasury  without  unduly 
depending  upon  the  workers  who  are  unable  to  sup- 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  71 

port  organization.  But  the  unions  of  the  Industrial 
Workers  have  given  no  extended  proof  of  the  willing- 
ness of  skilled  workers  to  financially  back  the  un- 
skilled. 

But  the  problem  of  organizing  women  is  only  in 
part  the  problem  of  organizing  the  unskilled  worker. 
The  question  of  why  more  women  are  not  members, 
of  unions  is  only  partially  answered  with  the  reasons 
for  lack  of  organization  among  the  unskilled.    There  is~X 
another  phase  of  the  problem   which   applies  to  all      \ 
wage-earning  women,    skilled   and   unskilled^     It   is 
the  woman's  problem,  and  is  a  more  distinctive  part       / 
of  what  is  known  as  the  women's  movement  jhan  it      / 
is  a__fuhy  recognized  part  of  the  labor  movement.    / 
But  it  is  a  part  of  the  Tatter,  and  affects  wages  as 
well  as  the  organization  of  all  labor. 

Men's  domestic  duties  coincide  with  the  perform- 
ance of  a  day's  work.  Their  day's  work,  moreover, 
fulfils  all  domestic  obligations.  When  men  have  com- 
pleted a  day's  work  for  the  boss,  they  have  earned  a 
day's  wage  for  the  family,  and  have  discharged  their 
obligation  to  both. 

Wage-earning  women  give  their  time  and  strength 
to  industry  as  men _giye  theirs,  but  women,  unlike 
men,  are  not  relieved  frQmJhome  duties  in  conse-  f^, 
quence.  They  are  expected_to  settle  home  problems 
and  make  home  adjustments  as  they  did  before_in- 
dustry  was  transferred  from  homes  to  factories. 
They  perform  their  day's  work  in  the  factory  in  addi- 


72  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Jionto  their  obligation  at  home.  They  go  into  in- 
dustry, in  short,  not  as  competent  wage-earners,  with 
the  common  needs  of  individual  human  beings,  but 
as  helpers-out  at  home.  They  have  little  conception 
of  their  place  in  industry  and  their  relation  to  other 
wage-earners,  but  they  have  a  very  present  realization— 
of  how  they  can  help  out  at  home.  With  this  attitude 
toward  their  work  they  readily  accept  a  wage  which 
is  an  auxiliary  wage,  that  is,  a  wage  which  supple- 
ments the  wages  of  others :  a  wage  which  does  not 
pay,  but  helps  to  pay,  the  rent;  a  wage  which  does 
not  cover,  but  helps  to  cover,  the  cost  of  the  family 
clothing. 

This  is  not  only  a  woman's  attitude  toward  her 
wage.  It  is  the  general  attitude.  The  woman  who  is 
thrown  entirely  on  her  own  resources,  who  has  no 
one  to  help  out,  and  no  one  to  help  her,  is  subject  to 
the  same  depressing  influence  of  the  prevailing  attitude 
toward  women  as  is  her  sister  who  pools  her  earnings 
with  the  members  of  her  family. 

No  one  expects  a  woman  to  take  her  wage-earning 
seriously,  or  to  consider  it  as  a  future  occupation. 
She  is  invited  to  indulge  in  the  glittering  generality 
that  marriage  will  relieve  her  of  all  financial  burdens. 
If  she  is  a  wage-earning  wife  or  daughter,  she  is  ex- 
pected to  change  her  work  to  suit  home  conditions  and 
demands,  which  are  seldom  changed  to  suit  her  work. 

This  attitude  toward  women  wage  earners  is  more 
serious  in  its  effect  on  wages  and  her  interest  in  the 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  73 

problem  of  her  fellow  workers  than  is  the  actual  bearing 
of  children.  The  eternal  emphasis  on  a  woman's 
response  to  the  demands  of  her  family  makes  it  diffi- 
cult for  her  to  realize  the  effect  of  her  underbidding 
her  fellow  workers  in  search  of  jobs,  or  her  responsi- 
bility to  them. 

The  appeal  to  her  to  help  build  up  an  organization 
for  permanent  protection  is  not  met  with  the  ready 
response  it  might  if  she  were  master  of  her  own  time 
and  if  the  future  were  as  clear  for  her  as  for  her 
brothers.  Even  as  she  answers  the  appeal  to  or- 
ganize, she  finds  that  it  is  difficult  to  attend  union 
meetings  in  addition  to  her  household  duties,  which 
must  be  done  before  or  after  the  day's  work  in  the 
store  or  factory. 

Many  labor  men  are  men  first  and  unionists  second. 
Such  men  are  often  too  annoyed  at  the  thought  of 
women  out  of  the  home  to  face  the  danger  which 
threatens  organization  by  leaving  her  free  to  shift  for 
herself  and  to  meet  organization  of  labor  as  she  meets 
capital,  as  best  she  can  and  in  her  own  way. 

'The  attitude  toward  the  organization  of  women  is 
dependent  upon  the  prevailing  attitude  of  a  locality. 
The  attitude  of  the  union  men  of  a  locality  is  the 
attitude  of  the  other  men  toward  women.  The  trade  ty 
union  men  of  California,  for  instance,  take  the  organi- 
zation ~oT  women  for  granted,  and  welcome  them  in 
administration  affairs,  while  the  trade  union  men-df 
New  York  are,  at  best,  politely  skeptical. 


74_  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

■• 

In  spite  of  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  building 
up  permanent  organizations  in  the  trades  where 
women  work,  it  is  now  a  generally  accepted  fact 
among  all  unionists  that  women  make  the  best  strikers.  \ 
They  have  answered  the  strike  calls  in  all  the  recent 
great  strikes  where  women  were  involved,  and  in 
these  large  strikes  and  in  all  others  they  are  invariably 
opposed  to  compromise  in  the  settlement  of  the  dis- 
pute, and  show  a  characteristic  feminine  tenacity 
which  is  the  most  valuable  asset  in  a  striker.  During 
the  silk  workers'  strike  in  Paterson,  N.  J.,  William  D. 
Haywood  said :  "  It  was  the  women  of  Lawrence  who 
won  the  Lawrence  strike,  and  if  the  Paterson  strike  is 
won,  it  will  be  the  women  who  win  it."  The  quality  of 
the  revolutionist  shows  up  in  women  on  strike,  and  this 
is  as  true  of  women  of  long  union  experience  as  it 
is  of  the  woman  in  her  first  rebellion  against  some 
industrial  oppression.  On  the  contrary,  the  conser- 
vatism of  union  men  is  supposed  to  increase  with 
experience.  There  may  be  several  reasons  for  this : 
women  usually  feel  less  responsibility  about  the  future 
of  a  union;  they  are  not  keen  about  a  career  and 
do  not  care  to  hold  office.  'A  woman  now  and  then 
who  makes  the  union  her  career  develops,  as  the  men 
do,  an_  official  attitude  toward  the  jiiovemenLA  But 
there  are  other  women  who  have  served  their  unions 
for  a  decade  or  more  who  never  lose  the  militant  spirit 
which  characterizes  them  as  strikers. 

The  strike  of  Shirt  Waist  Makers  in  1909  in  New 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  75 

York  City  was  the  first  demonstration  in  the  labor 
movement  of  the  possibility  of  organizing  all  the 
women  of  a  trade  by  calling  a  strike  of  the  whole 
trade  in  one  locality.  It  was  the  strike  of  the  Shirt 
Waist  Makers  which  gave  the  first  great  impetus  to 
the  organization  of  the  workers  making  women's 
clothing  and  which  placed  at  last  the  International 
Ladies'  Garment  Workers'  Union  in  its  present  posi- 
tion,— the  third  largest  union  affiliated  with  the 
American  Federation.  This  union  has  jurisdiction 
over  one  of  the  largest  fields  in  which  women  work. 
It  is  officered  by  men  who  believe  that  women  make 
good  strikers,  but  who  have  no  confidence  in  their 
ability  to  handle  union  affairs.  They  have  gone 
further  than  any  other  union  in  building  up  organiza- 
tion by  protocol  agreements  with  manufacturers  with- 
out a  conscious  sentiment  or  understanding  among  the 
workers.  They  claim  that  the  workers  as  a  whole  have 
no  real  conception  of  organization. 

It  is  difficult  to  say  how  great  a  part  of  the  increase, 
in  organization  of  women  is  due  to  the  Women's 
Trade  Union  League.  The  League  was  organized 
in  recognition  of  the  fact  that  woman's^parLin  the 
labor  movement  needed  undivided  attention.  Its  pur- 
pose was  to  emphasize  that  need.  In  the  ten  years 
of  its  existence  the  League  has  functioned  as  a 
woman's  as  well  as  a  labor  organization.  Its  ex- 
ecutive   councils    are    made    up    of    a    majority    of 


76  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

trade  union  women  who  are  members  of  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  of  Labor,,  but  it  has  been  material])' 
assisted  in  its  work  by  women  who  have  no  trade 
affiliations. 

The  League  was  tolerated  in  its  early  years,  and 
many  trade  union  officers  regarded  it  indulgently  as 
a  passing  whim.    It  is  not  so  regarded  to-day. 

The  League  has  been  persistent,  strenuous,  militant. 
It  has  kept  its  single  purpose  in  mind,  "the  organiza- 
tion of  women  into  trade  unions,"  until  it  has  at  last 
convinced  the  most  skeptical  of  its  integrity. 

Its  work  in  the  great  Shirt  Waist  Strike  in  New 
York,  the  Garment  Workers  in  Chicago,  and  the  Tele- 
phone Operators  in  Boston,  has  given  it  a  national 
reputation,  and  has  advertised,  as  no  other  single 
force  has  advertised,  the  idea  of  organization  for 
women  workers. 

In  the  face  of  all  difficulties  the  organization  of 
women  in  the  last  five  years  has  advanced  at  an  un- 
precedented rate.  The  New  York  Labor  Department 
reports  an  increase  in  that  state  for  1913  of  in  per 
cent.  It  is  interesting  to  observe  in  connection  with 
the  increase  the  changes  in  the  general  attitude  toward 
women. 

The  President  of  the  American  Federation  thus 
writes  in  a  confident  tone  of  the  woman's  movement, 
the  organization  of  working  women,  and  the  superior 
advantages  of  labor  unions  over  other  efforts  to 
improve  the  condition  of  women  workers : 


ORGANIZATION  OF  WOMEN  77 

.  .  .  the  forces  that  have  contributed  to  the  wom- 
an movement  have  been  increasing  in  scope  and  in- 
tensity. Women's  education  is  no  longer  inferior  to 
that  of  men  .  .  .  the  popular  attitude  toward  women's 
work  has  changed  completely.  .  .  .  This  woman  move- 
ment is  a  movement  for  liberty,  freedom  of  action  and 
thought,  tending  toward  a  condition  when  women  shall  be 
accorded  equal  independence  and  responsibility  with  men, 
equal  freedom  of  work  and  self-expression,  equal  legal 
protection  and  rights. 

...  we  should  view  with  apprehension  present 
sentiment  in  favor  of  setting  up  public  and  political 
agencies  for  securing  industrial  benefits  for  wage-earn- 
ing women.  These  agencies  would  constitute  a  restric- 
tion upon  freedom  of  action  capable  of  serious  abuses. 
Instead  of  aiding  women  in  the  struggle  for  industrial 
betterment  and  freedom,  we  should  be  foisting  upon  them 
fetters  from  which  they  would  have  to  free  themselves 
in  addition  to  the  problems  that  now  confront  them,  and 
we  should  still  leave  unsolved  the  problem  essential  to 
real  freedom — self-discipline,  development  of  individual 
responsibility  and  initiative.  The  industrial  problems  of 
women  are  not  isolated,  but  are  inextricably  associated 
with  those  _pi__mem...  .  .  We  cannot-  encourage  too 
enthusiastically  or  too  fully  efforts  of  women  to  help 
themselves,  to  secure,  for  themselves  needed  reforms, 
and  to  associate  themselves  in  trade  unions  which  pro- 
tect individual  freedom  and  promote  the  general  well- 
being.  x   1 


CHAPTER  VI 
INDUSTRIAL  AND  TRADE  ORGANIZATION 

Forces  which  make  for  trade  and  for  industrial  organization — 
Counter  criticisms — Past  efforts  to  form  industrial  unions — 
Opportunity  for  choice  of  form  of  International  A.  F.  of  L. 
unions — "  Autonomy  Declaration  "  of  A.  F.  of  L. — Jurisdic- 
tion disputes — Building  Trades  Department :  industry  divided 
into  trades  on  the  capital  side;  changes  in  processes;  re- 
duction of  sympathetic  movements — Metal  Trades  Depart- 
ment: efforts  to  amalgamate;  substitution  of  local  indus- 
trial agreements  for  trade — Railway  Employees  Depart- 
ment: the  "Federation  of  Federations" — Department  of 
Mines:  sentiment  against  trade  autonomy  within  the  A.  F. 
of  L. — Chicago  Pressmen's  strike — Strike  of  the  Light, 
Heat,  and  Power  Council  of  California — A.  F.  of  L.  in- 
dustrial unions:  United  Mine  Workers;  Western  Federa- 
tion ;  Brewery  Workers — Industrial  contract  with  capital — 
Industrial  unionism  of  I.  W.  W. — Where  an  industrial  and 
where  a  trade  union  functions. 

When  a  wage  earner  discovers  that,  as  an  individual, 
he  is  at  a  disadvantage  in  selling  his  labor;  and  that 
this  disadvantage  is  the  outcome  of  his  own  compe- 
tition with  fellow  workers  for  the  same  jobs,  the  dis- 
covery places  him  in  possession  of  the  remedy,  which 
is  combination.  The  sort  of  combination  which  logi- 
cally follows  his  discovery  is  not  combination  with 
all  wage  earners,  but  with  those  who  are  after  the 
same  jobs.  Such  combinations  are  the  trade  unions, 
and    such    unions    are    simple   business    propositions, 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  79 

especially  for  those  workers  who  pursue  trades  or 
crafts  which  require  some  degree  of  experience  and 
training. 

It  was  in  the  nature  of  the  situation  that  the  workers 
who  followed  a  trade  which  required  skill  and  train- 
ing would  be  interested  in  propositions  for  the  preser- 
vation of  trade  standards,  and  that  workers  without 
special  skill  would  show  less  concern.  As  skilled 
workers  can  earn  more  at  their  own  trade  than  at  any 
other  kind  of  labor,  the  keeping  up  of  the  wage  level 
is  to  them  a  matter  of  life  interest.  It  is  true,  as  a 
general  proposition,  that  organization  by  trade,  and 
permanent  organization  of  any  sort,  has  appealed  to 
workers  according  as  they  have  little  or  much  to  gain 
in  the  trade  they  follow. 

Trade  union  combination  is  so  obviously  superior  to 
the  competition  of  individuals  looking  for  work  that 
workers,  under  stress  of  intense  competition,  would 
have  combined  almost  instinctively  if  their  combina- 
tions had  not  met  the  drastic  opposition  of  those  who 
controlled  the  distribution  of  the  jobs. 

The  trade  form  of  organization  not  only  follows 
the  impulse  for  combination  under  stress  of  competi- 
tion, but  it  follows  individual  preferences  in  the  asso- 
ciation of  men  of  similar  equipment  and  social  stand- 
ing. All  other  things  being  equal,  machinists  as  a 
group  would  be  more  harmonious  than  a  mixed  group 
of  machinists  and  shoe  operators :  or  carpenters  would 
appreciate  association  with  other  carpenters  more  than 


80  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

association  with  the  various  sorts  of  employees  in  a 
department  store.  The  trade  union  is  in  this  sense 
an  instinctive  form  of  organization,  and,  as  it 
follows  individual  preferences,  it  is  the  primitive  form 
of  the  existing  labor  combinations.  Herein  lies  the 
strength  and  the  weakness  of  "  pure  and  simple " 
trade  unionism. 

The  industrial  union  is  based  on  the  labor  group- 
ings which  capital  creates  for  the  manufacture  and 
distribution  of  a  commodity  or  of  commodities  of  a 
similar  character  in  competition  or  use.  The  indus- 
trial unionists  not  only  disregard  the  personal  prefer- 
ences for  association,  but  they  set  themselves  the  task 
of  overcoming  those  preferences  and  creating  in  their 
place  new  desires  for  association  based  on  class  inter- 
ests which  develop  in  the  struggle  for  control  of  indus- 
try; for  industrial  freedom.  In  this  sense  the  indus- 
trial union  is  the  sophisticated  form  of  organization. 

The  industrial  union  may  provide  for  the  subsidiary 
association  of  craft  workers  who  are  in  direct  com- 
petition, but  these  trade  groups  are  auxiliary  and 
incidental  to  the  industrial  group  of  which  the  trade 
is  a  part.  While  the  trade  unionist  conceives  of  a  job 
as  a  thing  in  itself,  the  industrial  unionist  realizes 
that  it  is  a  part  of  a  process.  In  other  words,  the 
unit  of  organization  for  labor,  as  it  is  for  capital,  is 
the  industry  in  which  workers,  representing  possibly 
several  trades,  are  associated  for  the  manufacture 
of   a   product.      Some    industries   are   comparatively 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  81 

simple  in  their  processes,  and  the  membership  of  an 
industrial  union  is  therefore  not  necessarily  complex 
or  inclusive  of  several  trades. 

Whether  an  industry  is  complex  or  simple  in  its 
working  force,  whatever  may  be  the  divisions  of  the 
processes,  it  is  capital  and  not  labor  which  determines 
and  directs  it.  Capital  decides  what  kind  of  workers 
are  to  be  employed  and  employs  them.  As  capital 
sees  fit  it  discharges  them.  It  changes  the  processes 
and  the  kinds  of  workers.  As  capital  regards  the 
whole  group  with  a  single  eye  so  would  the  industrial 
unionist  regard  capital.  From  an  organization  point 
of  view,  labor  is  weak  or  strong,  in  agreement  with 
capital,  or  in  rebellion  against  it,  as  it  includes  every 
worker  which  capital  has  considered  of  sufficient  im- 
portance to  employ. 

The  industrial  unionist  lays  stress  on  the  importance 
of  change  in  the  form  of  organization  so  that  it  will 
correspond  to  the  changes  in  modern  industry.  He  is 
apt  to  assume  that  an  age  has  arrived  in  which  all 
industrial  processes  have  reached  a  maximum  state  of 
concentration  and  simplicity.  While  this  is  far  from 
the  truth,  concentration  is  a  characteristic  of  modern 
industry.  It  is  of  the  first  importance  to  labor  organi- 
zation that  new  methods  of  management,  no  less  than 
new  machinery,  are  creating  new  trades,  and  that  they 
are  re-creating  and  destroying  old  ones.  The  crea- 
tion of  a  new  trade  or  the  destruction  of  an  old  trade 
was  at  one  time  an  event   of  historic   importance; 


82  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

to-day  it  receives  not  much  more  than  passing  comment 
in  newspaper  notice.  The  industrial  unionist  charges 
that  the  trade  form  of  organization  is  as  ill  equipped 
to  fight  present-day  battles  as  were  the  gilds  to  repre- 
sent the  interests  of  the  journeymen  a  hundred  and 
fifty  years  ago.  The  industrial  unionist  thus  chal- 
lenges the  trade  unionist,  placing  him  on  the  defen- 
sive. 

The  trade  unionist  takes  up  the  challenge.  The 
defense  is  the  accomplishments  and  growth  of  the 
trade  unions,  particularly  during  the  last  quarter  of 
a  century.  In  the  face  of  powerful  opposition,  it  is 
the  trade  union  that  has  shortened  hours  of  labor  and 
increased  and  maintained  wage  rates,  if  not  real 
wages,  for  unnumbered  workers.  It  has  kept  before 
the  workers  of  the  country  the  principle  of  combina- 
tion, and  has  fought  incessantly  to  establish  and  hold 
the  right.  It  denies  that  industrial  organization  will 
successfully  coordinate  all  groups  of  workers.  It 
claims  that  trade  autonomy  with  federation  of  trade 
unions  is  meeting  the  modern  conditions  imposed  on 
labor. 

The  Railroad  Brotherhoods  and  the  controlling  fac- 
tion of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  represent 
these  claims.  The  latter  organization  can  point  to 
the  trials  which  it  has  made  in  the  past  in  industrial 
organization,  which  were  relinquished  for  the  pure 
trade  form,  as  in  the  case  of  the  printing  trade.  In 
1873  the  pressmen  separated   from  the  compositors 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  83 

and  formed  a  craft  union,  on  the  ground  that  their 
interests  were  overlooked  and  outvoted.  Twelve 
years  later  the  stereotypers  also  withdrew  and  formed 
their  own  independent  union.  The  year  following  the 
bookbinders  set  up  for  themselves.  They  all  are 
to-day  allied  through  printing  trades  councils,  but  their 
bargaining  is  conducted  independently,  and  their  al- 
liance precludes  sympathetic  strike  action. 

It  is  often  not  realized  that  a  large  number  of  inter-^ 
national  unions  of  the  American  Federation  have 
jurisdiction  over  several  related  trades  of  an  industry  . 
and  even  of  related  industries.  For  instance,  the 
longshoremen  control  about  forty  different  and  dis- 
tinct trades  in  the  general  business  of  transportation. 
While  these  are  included  under  one  charter,  issued  by 
the  American  Federation,  they  are  distinct  trade  or 
craft  groups  of  the  International  Longshoremen,  Ma- 
rine and  Transport  Workers'  Association.  The  Hotel 
and  Restaurant  Employees'  International  Alliance  and 
Bartenders'  International  League  is  one  organization, 
including  not  all  but  several  groups  of  workers  em- 
ployed in  hotels  and  restaurants.  The  cooks,  the 
waiters,  the  bartenders,  all  members  of  the  organiza- 
tion, in  making  agreement  or  in  strike  act  independently 
of  each  other.  But  the  independence  of  trades  within 
this  or  the  other  international  trades  union  is  a  policy 
determined  by  each  national  union  within  its  limits  of 
jurisdiction. 

It  is  important  to  understand  the  changes  and  transi- 


\ 


84  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

tions  which  are  taking  place  within  the  American  Fed- 
eration which,  it  is  claimed,  meet  the  objections  of 
industrial  unionists  to  the  general  trade  union  policy. 
The  officers  of  the  Federation  repeatedly  assert  that 
kthere  is  nothing  in  the  construction  of  the  American 
J  Federation  which  prevents  each  international  union 
from  adopting  industrial  organization  within  its  own 
province,  or  amalgamating  with  other  international 
unions,  so  long  as  it  does  not  challenge  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  another  international.  This  is  the  crux  of  the 
dispute  between  the  industrial  and  trade  union  advo- 
cates within  the  membership  of  the  Federation.  The 
administration  cherishes  the  trade  form  and  tolerates 
the  industrial  form  only  when  those  most  concerned 
resolutely  stand  for  the  latter.  The  effort  of  indus- 
trial unionist  members  is  to  reverse  this  position,  or 
even  to  force  the  trade  unionists  to  relinquish  their 
position,  however  much  they  may  be  concerned  to 
hold  it.  In  1901  the  American  Federation  of  Labor 
issued  what  it  calls  its  "  Autonomy  Declaration,"  as 
follows : 

As  the  magnificent  growth  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor  is  conceded  by  all  students  of  economic 
thought  to  be  the  result  of  organization  on  trade  lines, 
and  believing  it  neither  necessary  nor  expedient  to  make 
any  radical  departure  from  this  fundamental  principle, 
we  declare  that  as  a  general  proposition  the  interests 
of  the  workers  will  be  best  conserved  by  adhering  as 
closely  to  that  doctrine  as  the  recent  great  changes  in 
methods  of  production  and  employment  make  practicable. 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  85 

However,  owing  to  the  isolation  of  some  few  industries 
from  thickly  populated  centers  where  the  overflowing 
number  follow  one  branch  thereof,  and  owing  to  the 
fact  in  some  industries  comparatively  few  workers  are 
engaged  over  whom  separate  organizations  claim  juris- 
diction, we  believe  that  jurisdiction  in  such  industries 
by  the  paramount  organization  would  yield  the  best  re- 
sults to  the  workers  therein,  at  least  until  the  develop- 
ment of  organization  of  each  branch  has  reached  a  stage 
wherein  these  may  be  placed  without  material  injury  to 
all  parties  in  interest  in  affiliation  with  their  national 
trade  unions.  .  .  .  We  hold  that  the  interests  of  the 
trade-union  movement  will  be  promoted  by  closely 
allied  and  subdivided  crafts  giving  consideration  to 
amalgamation,  and  to  the  organization  of  District  and 
National  Trade  Councils  to  which  should  be  referred 
questions  in  dispute,  and  which  should  be  adjusted  within 
allied  crafts'  lines.1 

Eleven  years  later  this  declaration  was  reaffirmed, 
and  stands  to-day  as  the  official  word  on  the  subject 
of  trade  and  industrial  organization.  It  is  evident 
that  the  district  and  national  councils  or  departments 
referred  to  were  intended  as  clearing  houses  for  juris- 
dictional disputes  between  the  national  unions.  How- 
ever, these  trade  departments  which  have  been  created 
are  commonly  regarded  by  the  membership  as  the  sub- 
stitute for  proposed  schemes  of  industrial  organiza- 
tion. The  functioning  of  these  departments  is  for  that 
reason  important. 

The  four  trade  departments  are  the  building,  metal, 
mining,  and  railroad.  Before  the  proposition  was 
made  to  create  a  National  Building  Trades  Depart- 


86  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

merit,  local  building  trades  councils,  made  up  of  union 
representatives  of  all  the  trades  employed  in  the  build- 
ing industry,  had  had  years  of  experience  in  dealing 
with  disputes  of  related  unions.  The  building  indus- 
try in  all  large  centers  of  important  building  opera- 
tion has  furnished  fertile  soil  for  disputes  between 
craftsmen  over  their  respective  rights  to  a  job  and 
between  unions  claiming  their  trade  rights.  The  intro- 
duction of  new  methods  of  construction,  new  tools, 
new  materials  for  old  purposes  and  new  uses  for 
materials  is  the  normal  condition  of  the  industry. 
As  the  overlapping  and  shifting  of  trade  lines  vary 
in  almost  every  building  operation,  the  union  conflicts 
have  been  local.  The  changes  which  architects  intro- 
duce in  their  specification  for  practically  every  opera- 
tion of  importance  cut  across  the  trade  lines  marked 
out  by  trade  union  organization,  split  up  organiza- 
tion divisions,  and  even  create  new  trades  over  which 
no  one  local  more  than  another  can  claim  jurisdiction. 
In  disputes  over  the  disposition  of  a  job  the  mem- 
bers of  a  union  look  to  their  officers  to  see  that  their 
claims  are  won.  Carpenters  who  have  been  in  the  habit 
of  hanging  doors  expect  their  officers  to  see  to  it  that  the 
job  is  not  given  to  metal  workers  because  the  doors 
required  in  the  specifications  happen  to  be  metal.  But 
the  metal  workers  claim  that  all  work  done  in  metal 
belongs  to  them  and  that  carpenters  are  workers  in 
wood.  Such  disputes  may  seem  trivial,  but  it  is  a 
matter  of  bread  and  butter  to  the  carpenters  and  the 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  87 

metal  workers  concerned.  It  is  a  matter  of  impor- 
tance to  the  unions,  marked  out  as  they  are  on  trade 
lines.  Whichever  union  fails  to  win  out  finds  that  its 
standing  is  so  much  the  weaker  with  its  members.  As 
there  is  no  satisfactory  basis  for  the  settlement  of 
disputes  over  arbitrary  divisions,  many  of  the  local 
councils  have  resorted  to  arbitration,  or  even  have 
inserted  provisions  in  trade  agreements  that  no  strike 
shall  occur  because  of  jurisdictional  disputes.  While 
arbitration  reduces  friction  between  workers  and  em- 
ployers, and  prevents  the  interruption  of  building 
operations,  it  has  not  settled  the  problem  for  the 
unions; that  is, it  has  not  disposed  of  the  friction  within 
the  unions  as  well  as  between  them.  The  industrial 
union  not  recognizing  trade  divisions,  but  regarding 
each  operation  as  a  whole,  would  leave  the  burden  of 
dividing  up  the  work  to  the  architects  or  contractors 
and  avoid  internal  union  dissension. 

The  proposition  of  industrial  unionists  to  include 
all  the  workers  in  an  industry  under  one  contract 
would  not  apply  to  the  building  industry,  where  capi- 
tal is  disorganized  and  represented  by  trade  divisions. 
There  are  in  the  industry  contractors  for  electrical 
work,  for  masonry,  for  plumbing,  for  painting  and 
so  on.  Each  contractor  employs  tradesmen,  and  it  is 
with  these  trade  contractors  that  unionists  must  deal 
separately,  however  much  they  might  prefer  to  make 
one  industrial  contract  covering  all  artizans. 

These  divisions  on  the  employing  side  of  the  indus- 


88  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

try  have  made  difficulties  for  the  trade  unions  in  the 
enforcement,  as  well  as  in  the  making,  of  contracts. 
Such  difficulties  have  been  met  at  different  periods 
in  the  way  that  an  industrial  union,  not  bent  on  the 
making  of  contracts,  would  have  met  them;  that  is, 
by  sympathetic  strike  action.  The  local  councils  at 
times  were  the  means  of  making  sympathetic  strikes 
effective.  The  points  at  issue  were  frequently  won 
by  the  men,  often  enough,  at  least,  to  make  the  sym- 
pathetic strike  from  time  to  time  a  feature  of  building 
operations.  But  sympathetic  strikes  are  not  conducive 
to  a  policy  of  trade,  or,  for  that  matter,  a  policy  of 
industrial  agreements  between  labor  and  capital.  The 
building  trades  unions  were  eager  to  establish  con- 
tractual relations  with  employers.  A  reaction  against 
the  sympathetic  strike  method  was  inevitable. 

The  Building  Trades  Department  of  the  American 
Federation  considers  that  its  most  important  function 
is  to  accomplish  the  peaceful  settlement  of  all  disputes 
and  so  increase  opportunities  for  trade  bargaining. 
It  reported  in  19 12  that  it  has  been  successful  in  pro- 
moting a  higher  type  of  contractual  relations  between 
the  contractors  in  the  building  trades  and  the  inter- 
national unions  than  has  ever  been  known.  "  That 
we  have  been  in  large  measure  successful  in  this 
direction  is  amply  illustrated  in  the  admittedly  notice- 
able reduction  of  sympathetic  movements  during  the 
year  just  closed.  We  are,  so  to  speak,  occupying  a 
position   in   a   new   era,   one    in    which    questions   of 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  89 

gravity  still  confront  us,  of  sufficient  force  and  con- 
plexity  to  almost  warrant  radical  action,  and  surely 
would  have  so  resulted  a  few  years  ago.  Happily 
now,  however,  through  the  medium  of  the  Depart- 
ment, the  contestants  in  overlapping  trade  disputes  meet 
in  conference  and  reach  either  a  mutually  agreeable 
understanding  or  a  postponement  of  contemplated 
action  until  a  more  appropriate  opportunity,  indulg- 
ing the  hope  meanwhile  that  the  mellowing  influ- 
ences of  time  and  reason  will  work  out  a  solution  of 
the  issues  that  temporarily  estrange  them  ...  we  have 
.  .  .  more  nearly  approached  an  equilibrium  in  the 
maintenance  of  contract  or  agreement  relations  with 
the  builders  and  contractors  of  the  country  than  has 
been  known  since  the  introduction  of  machinery  and 
machinery  made  products."  2 

It  is  evident  that  strikes  had  become  a  serious  issue 
to  the  Department,  more  serious  than  the  friction 
between  the  craft  unions.  When  we  leave  a  problem 
to  "  the  mellowing  influences  of  time  "  it  would  seem 
that  we  are  weary  of  it  rather  than  attacking  it, 
especially  when  it  is  a  "  question  of  gravity  "  which 
"  almost  warrants  radical  action." 

There  is  a  movement  within  the  Metal  Trades  Union 
against  the  policy  of  trade  autonomy  in  matters  of 
collective  bargaining;  another  movement  is  toward 
amalgamation  of  trade  organizations.  Still  another 
movement  contemplated  sympathetic  action  between 
the  several  unions  represented  in  an  industry.     These 


90  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

movements  are  expressed  in  resolutions  presented  by 
delegates  from  all  parts  of  the  country  to  the  1913 
convention  of  the  Metal  Trades  Department.  The 
president  of  the  Department  in  making  his  report  told 
the  delegates,  "  There  seems  to  be  a  general  impres- 
sion among  the  local  unions  of  our  affiliated  inter- 
nationals, and  particularly  in  the  minds  of  a  great 
number  of  the  delegates  of  the  local  Metal  Trades 
Councils,  that  the  Metal  Trades  Department  is  em- 
powered with  authority  to  order  strikes  and  to  involve 
our  affiliated  unions  in  trade  movements  looking 
toward,  first,  a  reduction  in  the  hours  of  labor; 
second,  an  increase  in  wages;  third,  uniform  condi- 
tions of  employment;  and  fourth,  sympathetic 
strikes."  3 

The  resolutions  presented  by  the  delegates  at  the 
same  convention  show  less  a  misconception  of  the  pur- 
poses of  the  Department  than  a  desire  to  change  them. 
It  is  evident  that  the  president  realized  that  the  resolu- 
tions were  evidence  of  dissatisfaction  with  trade  di- 
visions and  autonomy  of  international  trade  unions. 
In  place  of  the  radical  propositions  of  the  delegates, 
the  president  recommended  an  extension  of  friendly 
relations  and  greater  cooperation  between  the  inter- 
national unions  and  the  trades  councils  and  the  De- 
partment. In  continuing  he  recommended  the  follow- 
ing plan  for  consideration :  "  In  localities  where  there 
is  a  desire  to  inaugurate  a  general  movement  affecting 
hours,  wages,  or  conditions  of  employment  that  this 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  91 

Department  be  authorized  to  make  a  thorough  inves- 
tigation of  the  conditions  prevailing  in  the  city  or 
locality  where  the  movement  is  started.  The  Depart- 
ment to  submit  its'  findings,  with  such  recommendation 
as  it  desires  to  make,  to  the  international  organiza- 
tions, and  if  the  internationals  agree  with  the  recom- 
mendations of  the  Department,  a  movement  shall  then 
be  inaugurated  under  the  advice  and  jurisdiction  of 
the  Department."  4 

There  was  nothing  in  the  recommendation  of  the 
president  which  suggests  a  curtailment  of  the  power 
or  control  of  the  international  unions  over  their  local 
unions.  The  president's  proposition  leaves  trade  juris- 
diction and  trade  autonomy  unimpaired.  It  is  the 
characteristic  position  taken  by  the  national  officers  of 
the  American  Federation. 

The  intention  of  the  delegates  who  offered  resolu- 
tions on  the  question  of  inter-union  relations  was 
clearly  opposed  to  the  regular  policy.  They  left  no 
doubt  that  they  were  standing  for  a  new  order,  and 
that  they  looked  to  their  national  Metal  Trades  De- 
partment, representing  the  metal  trades  industries  as 
a  whole,  to  take  the  lead.  These  resolutions  are 
important,  as  they  are  the  clearest  recorded  expres- 
sions from  the  membership  of  the  craft  unions  of  the 
American  Federation  in  favor  of  radical  changes  in 
forms  of  organization. 

In  criticising  the  movement  for  change  among  the 
members,  the  president  said : 


92  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

At  meetings  of  district  organizations  composed  of 
local  metal  trades  councils  and  local  lodges  of  interna- 
tional organizations,  located  in  the  Detroit-Toledo  terri- 
tory and  the  Pittsburgh  territory,  resolutions  have  been 
introduced  looking  toward  an  amalgamation  of  all  the  in- 
ternational metal  trades  organizations.  In  some  instances 
they  have  been  adopted,  in  others  rejected.  Similar  reso- 
lutions have  been  introduced  in  several  of  our  inter- 
national organizations'  conventions,  one  of  which  is  here 
quoted  .  .  .  :  "  Realizing  the  inadequacy  of  the  present 
system  of  craft  organization  to  protect  the  interests  of 
the  members  of  the  various  metal  trades  unions  against 
the  constant  encroachment  of  the  capital  class,  and 
whereas  the  Metal  Trades  Councils  and  local  unions  in 
the  several  states  have  moved  the  amalgamation  of  the 
metal  trades  unions  in  one  compact  body  to  enable  them 
to  better  resist  the  unfair  demands  upon  labor  by  or- 
ganized capital ;  therefore,  be  it  resolved,  That  this  in- 
ternational union  in  convention  assembled  endorse  the 
move  to  amalgamate  all  metal  trades  unions  into  one 
compact  body.   .    .    . " 5 


The  Metal  Trades  Council  of  Boston  sent  a  resolu- 
tion demanding  that  greater  power  be  given  local 
trades  councils  and  that  laws  be  enacted  compelling 
all  crafts  to  support  a  strike  where  one  has  been  en- 
dorsed by  a  majority  of  the  metal  trades  involved  and 
sanctioned  by  their  national  unions,  and  local  trades 
council  and  Department. 

The  Metal  Polishers'  Union  sent  a  resolution  de- 
manding that  when  the  members  of  one  trade  union 
are  on  strike  that  all  who  are  members  of  other  unions 
and  at  work  in  the  same  shop  be  compelled  to  with- 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  93 

draw  from  the  shop  during  the  strike  of  the  aggrieved 
union. 

The  resolutions  sent  to  the  convention  by  the  Metal 
Trades  Council  of  Newark  proposed  changes  in  the 
constitution  of  the  Metal  Trades  Department  which : 
(1)  would  require  all  affiliated  unions  to  quit  work 
in  shops  where  strikes  or  lockouts  affecting  any  one 
union  are  in  progress;  (2)  where  two-thirds  of  the 
unions  in  one  territory  vote  to  inaugurate  a  move- 
ment to  advance  the  interest  of  the  trades,  and  where 
they  have  secured  the  sanction  of  their  national  unions, 
all  other  unions  involved  in  the  industries  affected 
shall  be  directed  by  the  Metal  Trades  Department  to 
take  part;  (3)  no  union  shall  sign  agreements  govern- 
ing shops  until  all  affiliated  unions  of  the  Department 
represented  in  the  shops  have  come  to  an  agreement. 
These  proposed  changes  were  prefaced  by  a  state- 
ment which  might  have  come  from  the  most  radical 
exponents  of  industrial  unionism : 

The  chief  aim  of  a  Metal  Trades  Council,  as  our 
delegates  see  it,  is  the  assistance  and  support,  moral 
and  financial,  they  can  render  to  each  other  in  case  of 
emergency,  where  an  injury  to  one  shall  become  the  just 
injury  of  all.  In  this  city,  some  three  years  ago,  in  one 
of  our  largest  factories,  over  five  hundred  union  men 
were  employed  at  good  wages  under  strictly  union  con- 
ditions. The  management  decided  to  introduce  the  open 
shop  propaganda.  They  first  started  on  the  members  of 
the  Iron  Molders'  Union,  introduced  machines  with  handy 
men,  placed  unskilled  labor  on  duplex  machines,  kid  off 


94  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  prominent  union  men,  and  finally  made  matters  so 
unpleasant  that  a  strike  was  inaugurated;  the  battle 
waged,  but  other  trades  looked  on ;  claimed  that  they 
were  treated  all  right  by  the  firm.  They  had  no  griev- 
ance. When  the  Molders  were  practically  beaten  they 
then  laid  off  the  Pattern  Makers,  over  eighty  in  number. 
This  fight  of  the  Pattern  Makers  is  on  for  over  two 
years  with  no  prospect  of  a  settlement.  Within  the  past 
year  the  other  trades  in  the  plant  (who  had  no  grievance) 
have  been  effectually  squashed  and  the  firm  now  claims 
that  they  have  won  a  glorious  open-shop  victory,  while 
we  see  good  union  men  walking  the  streets  with  scabs 
working  in  their  places.  Our  Council  feels  that  the 
weapons  used  at  present  are  antiquated,  for  if  firms  can 
lick  one  trade  after  the  other  until  we  are  wiped  off, 
where  does  our  unity  of  action  come  in?  We  must  in 
future  emergencies  fight  unitedly;  fight  all  at  once  if  the 
one  great  fundamental  principle  of  organized  labor  is  to 
be  maintained.  .  .  .6 

The  resolution  which  the  convention  finally  adopted, 
and  which  stands  as  law,  provides  that  seventy-five 
per  cent,  of  the  international  organizations  repre- 
sented by  local  unions  in  a  district  must  sanction  a 
strike  or  a  movement  for  improved  conditions  of  the 
local  unions  involved  before  action  can  be  taken.  The 
international  organizations  which  refuse  to  comply 
with  a  strike  order  will  be  suspended  from  member- 
ship in  the  Department  of  Metal  Trades.  No  strikes 
over  jurisdiction  will  be  permitted.  No  union  will 
sign  an  agreement  governing  shops  where  members  of 
affiliated  unions  are  involved  in  a  strike  without  the 
consent  of  the  Department.    The  revised  law  requires 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  95 

a  concession  of  power  from  the  internationals,  but 
leaves  them  still  in  the  lead.  The  clause  providing 
against  jurisdictional  strikes  is  a  step  toward  unity 
of  action  between  the  craft  organizations.  Where 
local  district  councils  are  sufficiently  strong  the  inter- 
pretation of  the  new  law  will  probably  result  in  indus- 
trial rather  than  independent  trade  action;  that  is, 
there  will  be  joint  action  of  all  the  trades  involved 
in  a  local  industry  or  all  the  trades  in  a  single  estab- 
lishment for  improved  conditions  or  in  times  of  strike 
for  whatever  cause.  This  action  of  the  Department 
has  not  satisfied  the  rank  and  file.  A  convention 
of  the  Metal  Trades  was  held  a  year  later,  1914,  which 
considered  the  formation  of  machinists  in  depart- 
ments allied  with  the  industry  in  which  they  worked. 
The  point  was  made  that  the  machinists  could,  by 
striking  in  sympathy,  tie  up  an  industry  in  times  of 
dispute  between  the  workers  of  the  industry  and  their 
employers.  Also,  plans  for  the  amalgamation  of  all 
the  metal  trades  were  formally  received. 

A  reorganization  of  the  Railroad  Employees'  De- 
partment of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor  fol- 
lowed a  convention  called  in  19 12  for  federation  of 
all  railroad  workers.  This  Federation  of  Federa- 
tions, as  the  movement  was  called,  was  precipitated 
by  the  sympathetic  strike  action  of  related  crafts 
working  in  the  railroad  shops  of  the  Harriman  and 
Illinois  Central  lines.  The  international  officers  were 
forced  to  endorse  the  strike  of  their  local  unions  in- 


96  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

volving  31,000  shopmen  and  to  adopt  a  policy  for 
concerted  action  between  the  workers  on  the  system 
irrespective  of  their  craft  divisions.  After  the  con- 
vention the  Railroad  Employees'  Department  reor- 
ganized and  adopted  a  constitution  which  was  sub- 
stantially the  same  as  the  one  endorsed  at  the  conven- 
tion.    It  recites  that 

We,  the  members  of  the  various  labor  organizations, 
engaged  in  the  railway  industry,  recognize  the  necessity 
of  establishing  closer  affiliations  .  .  .  that  our  individ- 
ual craft  efforts  are  no  longer  sufficient  to  afford  us  the 
protection  necessary.  .  .  .  The  Railroad  Employees' 
Department  aims  to  bring  within  this  organization  all 
railway  employees ;  to  shorten  the  hours  of  labor  to 
eight  hours  per  day;  to  establish  a  minimum  wage  scale 
for  all  employees  in  all  branches  of  railway  service;  to 
bring  about  a  national  agreement.  .  .  .  The  operation 
of  railways  coming  more  and  more  under  the  supervision 
of  the  government,  the  standardization  of  freight  and 
passenger  rates  makes  for  the  standardization  of  pay  for 
employees  on  all  roads.  Hence  the  necessity  of  a  na- 
tional agreement  which  may  if  necessary  be  divided  into 
sections;  to  prevent  strikes  and  lockouts  whenever  pos- 
sible. 7 

It  was  hoped  that  the  Railroad  Brotherhoods,  which 
are  independent  of  the  unions  of  the  American  Fed- 
eration, would  surrender  their  independence  and  join 
the  movement  for  federation  of  all  railroad  workers. 
The  hope  has  not  been  realized,  and  the  movement 
for  federation  and  concerted  action  among  the  rail- 
road shopmen,  and  the  same  movement  of  the  men 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  97 

employed  in  train  service,  are  as  distinct  as  they  have 
always  been.  The  movement  among  the  shop  workers 
has  not  become  national  except  in  name  and  intention. 
The  secretary  of  the  Department  under  date  of  Feb- 
ruary 16,  1914,  writes: 

At  the  present  time  there  are  a  large  number  of  sys- 
tem federations  not  affiliated  with  the  Department,  each 
system  making  their  own  agreements  with  the  manage- 
ment through  their  Advisory  Board  members  not  to  ex- 
ceed five  members  from  each  craft.  In  our  present  some- 
what scattered  condition  we  are  prevented  from  promot- 
ing the  functions  of  the  Department  and  putting  into 
effect  the  full  measure  of  beneficial  results  that  would 
obtain  from  a  unity  of  interests  with  all  federations. 
These  conditions  are  being  gradually  overcome  and  I 
look  for  rapid  strides  in  that  direction  at  the  coming  con- 
vention, when  the  laws  will  no  doubt  be  so  amended  to 
overcome  any  objections  and  to  meet  the  requirements 
of  a  formidable  organization.  8 

In  September,  1913,  there  were  thirty-five  feder- 
ated agreements  with  single  railroad  systems  cover- 
ing usually  five  crafts :  the  machinists,  the  boiler- 
makers,  blacksmiths,  sheet-metal  workers,  and  car- 
men. 

The  movement  of  the  railroad  shopmen  for  joint 
action  between  craft  unions  is  local  and  from  the 
membership,  as  is  the  same  movement  among  the  metal 
workers.  It  is  not  an  official,  but  a  rank  and  file 
inspiration,  and  is  sufficiently  strong  to  modify  official 
policy. 


98  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  creation  of  a  Department  of  Mines  is  not  par- 
ticularly significant  as  an  industrial  movement  within 
the  Federation,  as  the  two  most  important  national 
unions  in  the  Department  are  themselves  industrial 
unions.  Moreover,  the  mining  of  coal  and  metals 
has  no  industrial  connection.  Metal  miners  do  be- 
come coal  miners  and  coal  miners  metal  miners,  but 
the  products  of  the  different  mines  are  not  commutable 
and  the  capitalization  of  the  industries  vary.  While 
the  affiliation  of  the  coal  miners'  union  and  the  metal 
miners'  is  not  an  industrial  move,  the  proposed  amal- 
gamation of  the  two  organizations  may  have  an  im- 
portant bearing  on  the  industrial  movement  within 
the  American  Federation. 

The  creation  of  the  national  trades  departments 
in  the  Federation  is  significant,  but  does  not  indicate 
an  effort  on  the  part  of  the  administration  to  modify 
trade  lines  and  trade  autonomy.  The  departments 
represent  the  effort  of  national  officers  to  curb  and 
control  the  local  movements,  which  disregard  or  at- 
tempt to  break  down  trade  divisions. 

The  official  sentiment  in  favor  of  trade  autonomy 
was  registered  at  the  last  two  conventions  of  the 
American  Federation.  At  the  1912  convention  the 
issue  appeared  when  the  Printing  Pressmen  laid  the 
story  of  their  Chicago  strike  before  the  delegates. 
The  Chicago  Pressmen  had  struck,  the  printers  and 
stereotypers  had  struck  in  sympathy.  The  respective 
international  unions  of  the  latter  ordered  the  printers 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  99 

and  stereotypers  back  to  work  on  the  ground  that  they 
had  struck  without  the  sanction  of  their  national 
unions  and  had  broken  their  contracts  with  their  em- 
ployers. Those  two  craft  organizations  had  made,  as 
was  their  custom,  separate  and  independent  contracts 
with  the  Newspaper  Publishers'  Association.  These 
contracts,  according  to  the  policy  of  their  international 
union,  they  were  bound  to  respect  regardless  of  the 
interests  of  the  Pressmen.  The  Pressmen  were  also 
severely  criticised  for  striking,  but  whether  they  had 
or  had  not  observed  the  ethics  of  contracting  was  quite 
another  matter.  The  issue  was  clearly  between  those 
who  rated  the  importance  of  a  trade  agreement  be- 
tween a  union  and  the  employers  above  the  solidarity 
of  labor  in  times  of  strife.  The  Pressmen  introduced 
a  resolution,  which  was  lost,  providing  for  joint  action 
of  all  unions  represented  in  a  single  industry.  It  was 
rejected  on  the  ground  that  it  did  not  conform  to  the 
"  Autonomy  Declaration  "  given  above. 

When  the  issue  came  up  at  the  19 13  convention  it 
was  over  the  strike  against  the  Pacific  Gas  and  Elec- 
tric Company  of  California.  The  strike  was  inaug- 
urated by  the  Light,  Heat,  and  Power  Council  of 
California,  which  includes  the  members  of  local  trade 
unions  working  together  in  the  industry.  The  trade 
unions  with  a  single  exception  were  affiliated  with  the 
international  unions  of  the  American  Federation.  The 
exception  was  the  union  of  electrical  workers,  which 
was    the    rival    of    the    Brotherhood    of    Electrical 


ioo  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Workers  of  the  American  Federation.  During  the 
strike  the  Federation's  Electrical  organization  fur- 
nished the  company  with  workers  from  its  own  or- 
ganization to  take  the  place  of  the  electrical  workers 
on  strike.  Scabbing  is  usually  considered  the  sin  of 
sins  by  labor  unions,  and  this  was  official  scabbing,  one 
degree  worse  in  the  mind  of  the  California  men  than 
the  scabbing  of  an  individual  worker.  The  represen- 
tatives of  the  Light,  Heat,  and  Power  Council  asked 
the  Federation  to  condemn  the  action  of  the  Brother- 
hood of  Electrical  Workers  in  furnishing  strike- 
breakers, and  to  endorse  the  strike.  But  the  conven- 
tion, composed  principally  of  international  officers,  re- 
fused. Official  scabbing  in  a  strike  was  not  as  great 
a  crime  as  was  the  official  support  of  a  rival  or  dual 
organization.  But  local  sentiment  was  too  strong  for 
the  issue  to  drop  in  convention.  The  president  of  the 
Federation  in  a  later  conference  with  all  the  organiza- 
tions concerned,  effected  a  significant  compromise.  It 
appeared  that  the  Brotherhood  of  Electrical  Workers 
was  opposed  to  the  policy  of  joint  action  of  local 
unions  such  as  had  been  taken  by  the  unions  of  the 
crafts  composing  the  Light,  Heat,  and  Power  Council. 
The  Brotherhood  was  forced  to  retract  its  position, 
and  the  rival  union  of  electrical  workers  agreed  to 
become  a  part  of  the  Brotherhood  of  Electrical 
Workers.  This  was  a  signal  victory  for  industrial 
solidarity. 

The   above   illustrations   show  that   the  movement 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  101 

within  the  American  Federation  for  closer  associa- 
tion of  craft  workers  comes  from  the  membership, 
which  in  some  cases  has  forced  official  recognition 
and  adoption. 

The  official  movement  for  industrial  organization  ! 
is  the  movement  led  by  the  three  unions  of  the  Fed- 
eration which  are  recognized  as  industrial :  the  United 
Mine  Workers   (coal  miners),  the  Western  Federa-     \ 
tion  of    Miners    (metal   miners),    and   the    Brewery     ' 
Workers'  Union. 

Attention  was  called  to  the  fact  that  the  Federation 
has  given  jurisdictional  rights  to  several  international 
unions  over  a  whole  industry;  that  so  far  as  the  Fed- 
eration is  concerned  these  international  unions  may 
organize  on  industrial  lines  or  may  break  up  into 
trade  divisions,  provided  they  do  not  encroach  on  the 
territory  of  another  international  union  chartered  by 
the  Federation.  This  provision  against  encroachment 
on  assigned  territory  makes  industrial  organization 
impossible  except  in  industries  where  similar  processes 
complete  the  product,  or  where  skilled  craftsmen  are 
not  required  or  are  unimportant.  Jurisdictional  lines 
are  carefully  guarded  for  such  important  craftsmen  as 
engineers,  electricians,  carpenters,  plumbers,  and  other 
workers  whose  artizanship  has  been  well  established, 
and  whose  unions  are  strong.  The  recognized  indus- 
trial unions  of  the  Federation  are  those  whose  claim 
to  jurisdiction  over  all  the  various  artizans,  skilled 
and  unskilled,  working  in  the  industry,  has  been  con- 


102  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ceded,  and  which  include  the  whole  group  of  workers 
irrespective  of  their  trade  divisions. 

The  United  Mine  Workers  were  granted  jurisdic- 
tion over  all  workers  of  whatever  crafts  who  were  em- 
ployed in  or  around  the  mines.  The  explanation  for 
this  departure  is  that  the  mines  are  isolated;  that  the 
men  mining  the  coal  are  the  dominating  labor  element; 
that  the  miners  could  do  more  for  the  organization 
of  the  scattered  workers  of  other  crafts  than  their 
own  craft  union  could  accomplish. 

The  charter  was  granted  to  the  Western  Federation 
of  Miners  on  the  same  basis,  and  it  was  only  on  that 
basis  that  the  Western  Federation  consented,  after 
years  of  opposition,  to  re-affiliate  with  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  and  its  policy  of  craft  unions  and 
trade  agreements.  One  of  the  arguments  used  to  in- 
duce the  Western  Federation  to  vote  for  affiliation  was 
that  as  members  they  could  do  more  to  change  the 
policy  of  the  American  Federation  from  a  trade  to 
an  industrial  policy  than  they  could  by  outside  opposi- 
tion. 

The  Brewery  Workers,  in  the  early  period  of  its 
affiliation  with  the  American  Federation,  outlined  for 
itself  an  industrial  form  of  organization.  As  it  was 
one  of  the  first  unions  chartered  by  the  Federation 
there  were  in  the  early  years  no  claims  of  other  unions 
for  jurisdiction  over  any  artizans  working  in  and 
around  the  breweries.  As  early  as  1887  the  secretary 
said: 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  103 

"  Experience  in  our  struggles  has  taught  us  what 
solidarity  means.  If  the  drivers,  the  coopers,  the 
engineers,  the  firemen,  the  maltsters  had  helped  us, 
our  victory  would  have  been  assured  within  twenty- 
four  hours  .  .  .  not  only  are  the  brewers  depend- 
ent upon  these  branches,  no — each  is  dependent  upon 
the  others.  Solidarity,  man  for  man  from  roof 
to  cellar,  all  for  each  and  each  for  all,  this 
alone  can  secure  our  future."  9  The  position  of  the 
secretary  was  endorsed,  and  the  regulation  adopted 
which  gave  the  various  crafts  involved  in  the  manu- 
facture of  beer  representation  on  the  Executive  Coun- 
cil. The  employers  realized,  also,  that  the  inclusion 
of  all  their  workers  "  from  roof  to  cellar  "  placed  the 
union  in  a  position  of  advantage.  When  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  granted  charters  to  craft  unions  which 
included  the  crafts  working  around  the  breweries  and 
in  conjunction  with  the  brewers,  the  brewery  owners 
did  their  part  to  encourage  the  dispute  over  jurisdic- 
tional rights.  These  disputes  have  never  been  com- 
pletely disposed  of.  The  fights  have  been  carried  back 
and  forth  through  the  conventions  of  the  Brewery 
Workers,  through  the  unions  of  the  other  crafts  in- 
volved, and  the  conventions  and  executive  councils  of 
the  Federation.  The  latter  in  1900  endorsed  the  gen- 
eral principle  of  industrial  organization  for  the  brew- 
ers. It  later,  under  pressure  of  the  other  national 
craft  unions,  decided  that  the  brewers  were  not  en- 
titled to  their  industrial  claims.    The  Brewery  Workers 


104  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

refused  to  recognize  this  decision  and  were  expelled. 
But  many  firemen,  engineers,  and  other  artizans  re- 
fused to  join  their  craft  unions  and  insisted  on  their 
membership  in  the  Brewery  Workers.  Many  local 
city  organizations  of  the  American  Federation  sided 
with  the  brewers  and  the  charter  was  at  last  returned. 
Before  this  reversal,  the  Brewery  Workers  issued  a 
statement,  of  which  the  following  is  a  part :  "  The 
Brewery  Workers  have  not  demanded  anything  more 
than  was  conceded  to  the  organizations  of  coal  miners, 
longshoremen,  seamen,  and  other  organizations;  the 
unions  named  demand  for  their  membership  the  engi- 
neers and  firemen  employed  in  the  mines,  on  the  docks 
and  on  the  ships  on  rivers,  lakes,  and  ocean."  10 

The  Brewery  Workers'  historian  writes  "  Thus 
the  jurisdiction  question  was  settled  in  principle,  but 
this  was  far  from  ending  the  actual  strife.  On  the 
contrary,  the  trade  unions  concerned  continued  to  do 
all  in  their  power  to  injure  the  brewers'  organiza- 
tion." X1  Strikes  of  Brewery  Workers  were  precipi- 
tated and  the  opposing  craft  unions  furnished  strike 
breakers  at  lower  wages.  Conventions  are  still  re- 
cording these  craft  disputes.  The  1913  convention 
of  the  American  Federation  was  endeavoring  to  ad- 
just the  difficulties  between  the  Brewery  Workers' 
Union  and  the  Teamsters.  This  special  dispute  il- 
lustrated the  conflict  which  follows  the  extension  of 
an  adversary.  The  Teamsters  had  been  forced  to  re- 
linquish the  men  who  drove  beer  wagons,  but  now 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  105 

they  complained  that  men  who  hauled  soft  drinks 
were  members  of  the  Brewery  Workers'  Union,  and 
they  demanded  that  their  claim  to  the  latter  be  en- 
dorsed and  the  Brewery  Workers  be  forbidden  the 
invasion  of  another  industry.  The  latter  admitted 
that  it  was  an  invasion,  but  not  theirs;  it  was  the  brew- 
ing industry  that  had  invaded  the  manufacture  of  soft 
drinks.  The  drivers  were  drivers  for  breweries  and 
they  had  nothing  to  do  with  what  was  loaded  on  their 
particular  wagon ;  it  might  be  beer  or  it  might  be  gin- 
ger ale.  All  they  knew  was  that  they  were  employed 
by  the  brewery  owners  and  were  engaged  to  do  the 
driving.  The  convention  decided  to  make  no  distinc- 
tion between  drivers  who  delivered  mineral  water  and 
those  who  delivered  beer,  so  long  as  they  were  both 
the  product  of  a  brewery.  The  drivers  of  mineral 
water  establishments,  it  was  decided,  should  be  mem- 
bers of  the  Teamsters'  Union.  It  was  not  decided  at 
what  particular  time  a  brewery  ceases  to  be  a  brewery 
and  becomes  a  manufactory  of  mineral  water,  and  the 
dispute,  it  is  safe  to  assume,  is  still  unsettled. 

The  whole  story  of  the  Brewery  Workers  in  re- 
lation to  industrial  unionism  is  of  peculiar  importance. 
It  throws  light  on  the  relation  between  the  form  of  a 
labor  union  and  the  development  of  an  industry  which 
has  evolved  from  home  manufacture  to  a  high  state  of 
capitalization  and  concentration  and  at  last  to  the  in- 
clusion of  related  products.  The  story  is  important, 
as  the  Brewery  Workers  have  met  a  greater  and  more 


106  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

persistent  opposition  from  the  craft  unions  than  have 
the  miners.  A  reason  for  this  is  that  their  industry- 
is  located  in  urban  centers  where  craft  unions  are  in 
active  operation. 

The  lines  of  organization  of  the  three  recognized 
industrial  unions  of  the  American  Federation,  the 
United  Mine  Workers  of  America,  the  Western  Fed- 
eration of  Miners,  and  the  Brewery  Workers,  as  well 
as  of  some  of  the  local  industrial  councils,  have  fol- 
lowed the  lines  marked  out  by  capital  in  its  develop- 
ment of  an  industry.  One  company  or  one  corpora- 
tion employs  all  the  workers  engaged  around  a  coal 
mine  or  mines  of  one  or  many  districts.  So  does  one 
organization  seek  to  control  all  the  men  working  for 
the  company  or  corporation  and  to  deal  with  them  as 
parts  of  a  whole  just  as  the  corporation  deals 
with  them.  The  national  union,  representing  all  the 
men  working  in  and  around  the  coal  mines,  seeks  to 
include  all  the  coal  miners  of  the  country,  and  to  deal 
with  associations  of  mine  owners  instead  of  with 
single  corporations.  But  it  is  not  the  effort  to  extend 
the  territory  or  to  centralize  the  bargaining  which  dis- 
tinguishes the  Miners'  Unions  and  the  Brewery 
Workers  as  industrial :  the  industrial  feature  is  the  in- 
clusion of  every  worker  employed  in  the  industry 
^in  the  making  of  the  agreements  with  the  employers. 
In  the  same  way  the  district  councils  are  indus- 
trial when  their  agreements  or  their  disagreements  in- 
clude each  and  every  worker  employed  in  the  industry. 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  107 

These  organizations  are  examples  of  what  may  be 
called  the  pure  and  simple  industrial  union,  including 
as  they  do  all  the  workers  employed  in  a  single  indus- 
try. The  purpose  of  the  pure  and  simple  industrial 
union  of  the  American  Federation  is  the  same  as  the 
purpose  of  the  pure  and  simple  trade  unions ;  the  mak- 
ing of  agreements  with  capital  for  conditions  of  em- 
ployment. These  unions  regard  the  treaties  with  capi- 
tal and  each  economic  gain  for  the  workers  as  im- 
portant ends  in  themselves.  Their  effort  is  to  make 
treaties  and  avoid  war  whenever  a  labor  gain  can  be 
secured  through  peaceful  bargaining  or  when  a  treaty 
brings  some  token  of  gain  to  the  industrial  group. 

The  foregoing  is  a  review  of  departures  within  the 
Federation  of  Labor  from  the  theory  of  one  union 
for  every  trade.  It  is  found  (1)  that  a  number  of 
chartered  national  unions  have  been  given  jurisdiction 
over  all  workers  in  one  or  even  related  industries 
providing  that  they  do  not  include  workers  who  be- 
long to  another  chartered  union;  (2)  that  local  trade 
unions  through  local  district  councils  are  making  joint 
industrial  agreements  and  are  taking  other  joint  ac- 
tion which  disregard  the  interest  of  the  trade  group 
where  it  conflicts  with  the  industrial  group;  (3)  that 
there  are  three  pure  and  simple  industrial  unions  which 
have  retained  in  their  membership  workers  whose 
trade  is  represented  in  chartered  trade  unions.  It  is 
also  found  that  the  first  and  third  were  advised,  or 
official  movements,  and  the  second  a  movement  which 


108  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

was  forced  by  the  rank  and  file;  that  the  Trade  Depart- 
ments of  building,  metal,  and  railroads  are  reflections 
of  the  district  or  rank  and  file  movements  and  attempts 
to  regulate  them  and  reconcile  them  with  the  prin- 
ciples of  trade  autonomy  and  trade  jurisdiction. 

Having  reviewed  the  movement  for  industrial  or- 
ganization within  the  American  Federation,  it  re- 
mains to  turn  again  to  the  organization  which  has 
recently  popularized  the  idea  of  the  industrial  union, 
which  is  the  industrial  unionism  known  to  the  public 
generally  outside  of  union  circles.  It  is,  indeed,  the 
claim  of  the  I.  W.  W.  that  there  is  no  industrial  union- 
ism except  its  own;  that  the  "so-called  industrial 
union "  of  the  American  Federation  differs  in 
important  respect  from  the  pure  and  simple  trade 
union.  This,  as  has  been  shown,  is  not  the  case. 
Moreover,  a  comparison  of  the  industrial  union  de- 
scribed in  this  chapter  with  the  industrial  union  of  the 
Industrial  Workers  described  in  the  chapter  dealing 
with  that  organization  will  show  that  in  form,  or  con- 
templated form  of  organization,  the  industrial  unions 
of  the  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  and  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  are  not  radically 
different.  The  similarity,  however,  ends  with  the 
form. 

The  purpose  of  the  industrial  unions  of  the  Ameri- 
can Federation  is  to  contract  with  employers  for  con- 
ditions of  work,  just  as  is  the  purpose  of  the  trade 
union.     The  industrial  union  to  the  Industrial  Work- 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  109 

ers  is  not  a  treaty-making  instrument,  but  an  instru- 
ment of  war.  In  organizing  its  army  on  industrial  in- 
stead of  craft  lines,  the  purpose  of  the  Industrial 
Workers  is  to  place  class  interests  and  revolutionary 
intent  above  the  personal  and  present  interests  of  in- 
dividual workers.  Each  strike  is  a  skirmish  in  prep- 
aration for  the  final  conquest  of  industry.  While  the 
Industrial  Workers  recognize  a  truce,  figuratively 
speaking  it  refuses  to  lay  down  its  arms.  The  return 
of  men  to  work  after  a  strike  it  regards  as  a  truce, 
never  a  treaty.  The  gains  in  conquest  are  not  meas- 
ured by  increases  in  wages  but  by  the  army's  spiritual 
strength :  in  other  words,  the  growth  of  the  class 
spirit,  tested  by  its  quickening  response  to  the  call  for 
action.  * 

As  it  happens  there  is  a  strong  Socialist  bias  among 
the  members  of  the  two  miners'  unions  and  the  union 
of  the  brewery  workers.  Some  of  them  look  to  the 
ballot  rather  than  to  the  union  for  the  final  overthrow 
of  the  capitalist  system.  The  Western  Federation  of 
Miners,  until  recently,  held  the  position  now  advocated 
by  the  Industrial  Workers.  They  are  reversing  their 
policy  of  no  contracts  with  employers  on  the  ground 
that  without  contracts,  or  at  least  without  union  recog- 
nition, they  are  powerless  to  prevent  discrimination 
against  active  members  and  a  consequent  disintegra- 
tion in  organization. 

*  For  fuller  criticism  and  for  scheme  of  industrial  unionism  of 
I.  W.  W.,  see  Chapter  IV. 


no  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  intention  of  industrial  unionism  may  be  either 
to  secure  inter-union  action  between  groups  of  related 
workers  of  an  industry  for  the  purpose  of  strengthen- 
ing the  power  of  the  group  in  the  making  of  agree- 
ments with  capital,  or  to  unite  the  related  groups  of  an 
industry  for  the  purpose  of  developing  class  action, 
and  to  depend  solely  on  this  development  to  force 
concessions  from  capital  without  entering  into  con- 
tract with  it. 

Where  capital  is  organized  throughout  an  industry, 
as  in  mining  and  railroading,  the  organization  of  the 
workers  along  industrial  lines  offers  obviously  the  best 
opportunity  for  collective  bargaining.  But  in  such 
industries  as  building,  where  capital  is  divided  by 
trades,  there  is  no  such  obvious  advantage  in  the  indus- 
trial organization  of  the  workers,  as  their  bargaining 
must  follow  trade  lines. 

Where,  however,  the  object  of  industrial  organiza- 
tion is  class  action  without  intention  or  desire  to 
contract  with  capital,  it  is  not  important  whether  capi- 
tal is  organized  on  trade  or  industrial  lines.  The  im- 
portant consideration  is  the  elimination  of  lines  which 
divide  labor  interests. 

The  allegiance  of  the  more  highly  skilled  artizans  to 
the  trade  form  of  organization  is  weakened  as  their 
position  as  craftsmen  is  weakened,  that  is,  as  ma- 
chinery and  management  reduce  the  craft  to  a  lower 
level  of  skill  and  artizanship.  The  trade  unionist 
delays  the  transformation.     A  craftsman  quite  natu- 


INDUSTRIAL  ORGANIZATION  in 

rally  resists  changes  which  accelerate  the  leveling  of 
his  trade  to  semi-skilled  or  common  labor. 

The  question  which  agitates  unionists  is  how  to  keep 
up  the  trade  form  of  organization,  to  maintain  wage 
standards,  and  to  accomplish  the  purpose  of  the  indus- 
trial organization,  which  is  the  amalgamation  of  in- 
dustrial interests.  The  pure  and  simple  industrial 
union  does  not  answer  the  question  fully.  Its  answer 
involves  the  whole  proposition  of  sympathetic  action 
between  all  groups  of  workers,  whether  they  be  trade 
or  industrial  in  form  of  organization. 


CHAPTER  VII 
SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE  ACTION 

What  sympathetic  action  means — Stumbling  blocks — Indeter- 
minate contracts — Amalgamation — Industrialism — Position  of 
the  "  labor  aristocracy  " — Forces  which  make  for  and  against 
— Machinists'  present  position — Industrial  unionism  not 
necessarily  sympathetic  action. 

Industrial  unionism  is  closely  allied  to  movements 
for  "  sympathetic  action  "  between  groups.  Industrial 
unionism,  in  fact,  is  sympathetic  action  so  far  as  it 
goes;  but  it  is  not  necessarily  committed  to  sym- 
pathetic action  as  a  policy  any  more  than  is  a  pure 
and  simple  trade  union.  A  policy  of  sympathetic 
action  between  trade  unions  or  industrial  unions  de- 
mands that  related  groups  shall  strike  in  sympathy 
with  other  groups  as  their  struggles  with  capital  may 
require.  Obviously  an  unrestricted  pursuit  of  this 
policy  would  mean  a  general  and  continuous  warfare. 
Unions  which  advocate  sympathetic  strike  action  ad- 
vocate the  elimination  of  all  union  regulations  which 
place  obstructions  in  the  way  of  such  action. 

The  first  business  of  a  union,  given  jurisdiction  over 
a  trade  or  an  industry,  is  to  organize  the  workers 
within  its  own  territory.  It  may  or  it  may  not  act 
in  conjunction  with  other  unions.     As  a  matter  of 

112 


SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE  ACTION  113 

history,  autonomous  unions  with  a  prescribed  territory 
have  found  it  necessary  to  rivet  their  attention  on  their 
own  affairs  which  have  met  the  constant  opposition 
of  employers.  The  American  Federation  looks  to  its 
National  Council  and  the  city  central  bodies  to  de- 
velop fraternal  relations  between  unions  along  moral 
and  financial  lines,  but  guards  against  sympathetic 
strikes  through  national  trade  autonomy  and  juris- 
dictional provisions. 

Besides  autonomy  and  jurisdictional  provisions,  the 
relations  which  collective  bargaining  develops  be- 
come stumbling  blocks  to  sympathetic  strike  action. 
It  is  the  universal  experience  of  all  labor  unions  that 
successful  contracting  with  capital  precludes  sympathy 
strikes.  Successful  contracts,  like  other  business  rela- 
tions, demand  that  each  party  to  the  contract  hold 
the  interests  involved  in  mutual  esteem.  The  failure 
of  either  party  to  do  so  jeopardizes  future  as  well  as 
present  relations.  As  has  been  said  before,  the  na- 
tional building  trades  movement,  having  experienced 
the  inconsistency,  is  now  working  for  the  elimination 
of  the  sympathy  strike,  and  the  realization  of  perma- 
nent bargaining  relations  with  capital. 

It  is  often  suggested  that  indeterminate  contracts 
would  make  sympathy  strikes  possible;  that  a  union 
not  under  contract  for  a  fixed  period  would  be  in  a 
position  to  strike  in  sympathy  with  another  union 
without  breaking  its  agreement  with  an  employer. 
But  the  fixing  of  a  time  limit  has  very  little  to  do  with 


U4  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  strained  relations  which  immediately  develop  be- 
tween an  employer  and  his  workers  who  go  on  strike. 
Under  any  condition,  there  are  slim  chances  of  suc- 
cessfully maintaining  business  relations  with  em- 
ployers and  active  sympathy  with  all  sister  unions  at 
one  and  the  same  time. 

The  industrial  unions  of  the  American  Federation 
propose  to  reconcile  sympathetic  action  and  contract- 
ing with  capital  by  the  amalgamation  of  related  groups 
of  an  industry  and  the  extending  of  the  contract  over 
the  whole  group.  Amalgamation  for  contracting  pur- 
poses is  effective  only  where  capital  is  concentrated  or 
well  organized  in  an  industry;  it  does  not  serve  the 
purpose  of  collective  bargaining  where  it  is  divided, 
as  in  the  building  trades.  Moreover,  the  amalgama- 
tion of  the  trades  of  an  industry  does  not  eliminate 
the  demand  for  sympathetic  action  between  related 
industries.  This  was  realized  by  the  coal  miners  dur- 
ing their  strike  in  the  northern  coal  fields  of  Colorado. 
While  every  man  who  worked  in  and  around  the 
mines,  when  the  strike  was  ordered,  went  out  and 
remained  out,  they  complained  that  the  operators  were 
aided  in  their  efforts  to  break  the  strike  by  men  who 
were  members  of  other  unions.  Union  carpenters 
from  Denver,  working  under  an  agreement  with  Den- 
ver contractors,  built  the  pens  for  the  protection  of 
strike-breakers.  Also,  union  men  working  on  the  rail- 
roads hauled  the  coal  mined  by  the  strike-breakers. 
The  miners  observed  that  their  union  was  industrially 


SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE  ACTION         115 

organized;  that  every  man  employed  by  the  mining 
company  had  struck;  but  that  their  strike  needed  as 
well  the  co-operation  of  other  unions;  that  sympathetic 
strike  action  is  as  important  to  an  industrial  union  as 
it  is  to  a  trade  union.  It  was  also  observed  that  an 
industrial  union  like  the  coal  miners  was  in  no  better 
position  to  strike  in  sympathy  with  other  unions  than 
is  a  trade  union.  During  the  strike  in  the  Illinois 
Central  railroad  shops,  union  miners  supplied  the  road 
with  coal. 

The  demand  for  sympathetic  action  comes  invari- 
ably from  groups  of  workers  who  find  themselves  in  a 
weak  position  either  permanently  or  temporarily  as  in 
time  of  strikes.  It  comes  from  workers  who  are 
conscious  of  their  inability  to  meet  alone  the  exigencies 
of  organization.  It  is  common  to  hear  highly  skilled 
craftsmen,  or  the  members  of  well  established  unions, 
called  the  "  aristocracy  of  labor."  It  is  an  accurate 
description  of  the  alienation  between  organized  groups 
where  interests  divide  and  opposing  lines  of  action 
develop. 

There  is  actually  more  sympathy  between  a  well 
established  labor  union  and  a  corporation  entering 
into  contract  with  it  than  there  is  between  the  same 
union  and  groups  of  casually  organized  migratory 
workers  or  unemployed  men  demanding  work  in  mass 
action.  It  is  common  to  find  that  such  unionists  are 
as  scornful  of  the  efforts  of  these  men  as  is  the 
United  States  Steel  Corporation  scornful  of  efforts 


n6  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

among  their  employees  at  organization  or  even  the 
efforts  of  the  American  Federation  to  organize  them. 
This  attitude  of  superiority  of  union  men  and  their 
alienation  is  bitterly  criticised  by  the  less  fortunately 
placed  workers.  It  is  to  them  a  clear  failure  to  live 
up  to  professions  of  fraternity;  to  the  injunction, 
"  The  interest  of  one  is  the  interest  of  all." 

It  is  not  always  realized  that  this  demand  for  un- 
limited sympathy  means  a  complete  sacrifice  of  the 
few  privileges  and  decencies  which  restricted  union 
action  has  secured.  Union  men  have  the  human  limi- 
tations of  other  men.  Men  and  women,  not  of  the 
wage-earning  class,  who  enjoy  positions  of  greater 
opportunity  than  the  labor  aristocracy,  often  add  their 
criticism  of  the  latter  for  its  refusal  to  risk  its  privi- 
leges for  the  sake  of  the  weaker  brother.  Under  the 
circumstances,  their  criticism  sounds  a  little  cheap  to 
the  labor  aristocracy. 

When  a  group  of  workers  has  secured  through  its 
union  a  position  superior  to  other  groups  its  sympathy 
is  generally  expressed  through  financial  donations.  Its 
refusal  to  go  farther,  to  jeopardize  its  own  position, 
is  not  difficult  to  understand.  Having  fought  for  its 
own  position  against  fearful  odds  it  becomes  tenacious 
of  its  gains.  At  best  its  position  is  precarious,  and, 
like  other  groups  or  individuals  in  precarious  positions, 
it  doubts  its  ability  to  share  its  foothold.  It  knows  the 
difficulties  of  organization,  and,  if  it  is  a  union  of 


SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE  ACTION         117 

skilled  artizans,  it  has  little  confidence  that  unskilled 
workers  can  weather  the  storms  of  organization. 

Against  these  class  divisions  within  the  whole  group, 
which  stultify  and  pervert  the  idea  of  a  labor  democ- 
racy, there  are  leveling  forces  which  are  breaking 
down  the  lines  of  division.  When  a  craft  is  reduced 
either  by  machinery  or  shop  management  to  a  lower 
level  of  skill  or  artizanship,  the  workers  affected  find 
that  their  position  in  the  trade  union  world  is  weak- 
ened and  their  economic  gains  secured  by  organization 
are  in  peril.  These  men,  for  the  first  time  possibly, 
realize  the  need  of  cooperation  with  other  labor 
groups;  they  realize  that  labor  unity  must  extend  across 
trade  lines  as  well  as  within  them;  that  this  unity,  in- 
deed, is  as  important  as  trade  unity.  Men  reduced  in 
their  position  are  the  best  possible  recruits  to  the  move- 
ment for  sympathetic  action.  It  is  a  truism  in  labor 
union  circles  that  men  fight  harder  against  reductions 
than  for  advance. 

The  metal  workers  at  present  are  the  most  important 
acquisition  to  the  democratic  movement.  They  have 
by  shop  management  and  machinery  been  reduced  in 
large  numbers  from  artizans  to  the  ranks  of  the  semi- 
skilled. Their  recent  change  in  policy,  described  in 
the  preceding  chapter,  proposes  to  turn  their  losses 
into  gains  for  the  whole  labor  account  and  to  endow 
that  account  with  new  strength  and  leadership.  (See 
Chapter  VI.) 

While  the   lack   of   sympathy   between   the  casual 


n8  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

laborer  and  the  well  established  trade  unionist  is  a 
constant  reminder  that  the  spirit  of  labor  solidarity 
is  lacking  when  a  sympathetic  movement,  like  the 
machinists,  is  started,  or  when  a  sympathetic  strike 
occurs  (an  insufferable  conspiracy  in  the  eyes  of 
employers),  every  union  man  is  conscious,  whether 
his  judgment  sanctions  the  action  or  not,  that  the 
act  itself  is  the  supreme  expression  of  the  union 
movement;  that  it  is  the  final  test  of  a  worker's  loyalty 
to  his  fellow  workers. 

There  is  a  common  impression  among  the  radical 
labor  people  that  the  trade  union  men  are  wanting 
or  quite  lost  where  questions  depending  on  class  action 
arise.  The  Colorado  miners'  war  against  the  attacks 
of  a  corporation-owned  state  militia  and  their  efforts 
to  break  the  miners'  strike,  brought  out  evidences  of 
deep  and  substantial  sympathy  which  trade  union  men 
were  ready  and  eager  to  give.  It  was  enough  for 
many  old-line  trade  unionists  to  know  that  their 
brothers  of  another  union  had  taken  up  arms  in  self- 
defense,  for  them  to  throw  themselves  into  the  fight. 
Such  conservative  unions  as  the  Cigar  Makers,  the 
Typographical,  and  the  Building  Trades  Council  of 
Denver,  voted  money  to  purchase  arms  and  ammuni- 
tion for  the  miners'  war.  The  Machinists  and  the 
Trades  and  Labor  Assembly  of  Colorado  recruited 
regiments  from  their  memberships.  The  president  of 
the  State  Federation  of  Labor  transported  arms  from 
one  miners'  camp  to  another.     Members  of  the  Rail- 


SYMPATHETIC  STRIKE  ACTION  119 

road  Brotherhood  refused  to  carry  the  militia  into  the 
strike  district. 

The  Colorado  strike  proved  what  all  members  of 
unions  know,  that  labor  men  with  a  strong  sense 
of  their  labor  affiliations,  whether  they  are  conserva- 
tive or  radical  in  the  every-day  methods  and  aims  of 
organization,  will  answer  the  call  for  solidarity  when  a 
rebellious  union  takes  up  arms  against  a  state  militia. 
Throughout  the  country  there  were  hundreds  of  union 
men  ready  to  fall  in  at  the  miners'  call.  They  did  not 
question  whether  the  miners  would  win  or  lose, 
whether  the  strike  was  justified  or  judicious.  Rash 
they  might  be,  but  the  miners  were  desperate  and 
fighting  against  entrenched  interests  and  were  risking 
their  lives  and  all  they  valued.  It  was  a  signal  which 
few  labor  union  men  failed  to  recognize  and  which 
many  were  ready  to  answer  if  called. 

Sympathetic  action  is  something  apart  from  the  form 
of  organization.  Industrial  councils  of  trade  unions 
and  industrial  unions  are  recognitions  of  the  need  of 
closer  association  and  common  action;  they  are  steps 
toward  sympathetic  action  but  not  substitutes  for  it. 
The  realization  of  sympathetic  action  among  all 
workers  is  dependent  on  spirit,  experience  and  under- 
standing as  it  grows  out  of  experience.  While  the 
form  of  an  organization  may  be  an  expression  of  its 
growth,  it  may  perish  under  the  one  form  as  well 
as  the  other. 


CHAPTER  VIII 

UNION    RECOGNITION    AND    THE    UNION 

SHOP 

Consistent  with  the  partnership  theory — "  The  free  American 
workman"  the  anarchist  in  industry — The  "scab"  a  grafter 
— An  A.  F.  of  L.  weapon — Position  of  different  internationals 
— Preferential  shop. 

A  union  shop,  called  outside  of  union  circles  a 
"  closed  shop,"  that  is,  a  shop  where  the  owner  has 
agreed  to  employ  only  members  of  a  union,  and  union 
recognition,  or  the  agreement  by  the  employer  to  deal 
with  representatives  of  the  union,  instead  of  with 
his  employees  individually  as  to  this  or  that  condition 
of  employment,  are  both  demands  that  follow  logically 
the  program  of  the  American  Federation  of  Labor. 

These  demands  are  inherent  parts  of  the  theory 
of  the  partnership  relation  between  capital  and  labor. 
They  are  usually  considered  strategic  measures,  but 
they  are  more  than  that.  They  are  acknowledg- 
ments of  the  principle  of  a  partnership  relation 
between  capital  and  labor,  and  they  give  all  subsequent 
acts  their  sanction. 

To  a  disciple  of  the  partnership  theory,  it  is  as 
consistent  to  claim  that  a  man  enlisted  in  the  service 
of  a  state  is  "  free  "  in  his  American  citizenship  to 

120 


UNION  RECOGNITION  121 

serve  special  interests,  not  sanctioned  by  the  state, 
as  it  is  to  claim  that  an  individual  worker  or  individ- 
ual employer,  enlisted  in  the  service  of  industry,  is 
free  either  to  accept  conditions  of  employment,  or  to 
impose  them  before  they  are  agreed  to  by  the  industry 
as  a  whole,  or  in  the  interests  of  all.  A  worker  who 
insists  on  his  personal  rights,  irrespective  of  the  rights 
of  others,  to  work  for  whom  he  pleases  and  on  terms 
which  please  him,  is  the  anarchist  of  industry,  as  are 
also  those  who  praise  and  protect  him  in  his  assumed 
right.  On  grounds,  then,  of  ethical  implication,  and 
in  the  interest  of  justice  and  industrial  peace,  the 
"  free  American  workingman "  and  the  non-union 
employer  become  fit  subjects  for  coercion. 

The  demand  for  a  union  shop  is  closely  associated 
with  the  attitude  of  unionists  toward  non-unionists. 
The  non-unionist,  or  scab,  is  a  grafter  to  all  union 
men.  He  enjoys  the  rewards  of  improved  conditions 
which  have  resulted  from  sacrifices  of  labor  unionists 
without  himself  having  shared  or  suffered  in  their 
sacrifices.  In  other  words,  all  labor  unionists  recog- 
nize through  their  bitter  experience  that  one  of  the 
results  of  the  partial  organization  of  the  trade  or 
industry,  of  a  successful  or  partially  successful  strike, 
is  the  victimization  of  the  men  and  women  who  have 
borne  the  brunt  and  burden  of  the  strike;  that  the 
reaping  of  whatever  rewards  or  benefits  result  from 
organized  action  are  enjoyed  by  the  strike-breaker 
as  well  as  by  the  striker.     They  are  enjoyed  by  the 


122  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

man  who  fought  against  the  award,  and  against  the 
men  who  made  the  struggle,  who  paid  the  price,  and 
who  won  the  fight  for  all. 

Approaching  the  question  of  the  union  shop  from 
opposite  positions,  the  Railway  Brotherhoods  and 
Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  oppose  the  position 
of  the  American  Federation.  The  Brotherhoods  in 
theory  stand  with  those  who  preach  the  rights  of  the 
"  free  American  workmen."  As  a  matter  of  fact,  the 
insurance  features  of  the  Brotherhoods  have  brought 
the  bulk  of  railroad  workers  into  membership,  and 
for  membership  purposes  the  union  shop  regulation 
is  unnecessary.  But  on  other  grounds  the  union  shop 
is  not  necessary  to  railroad  organization.  The 
unform  regulations  of  a  railroad  extend  over  whole 
classes  of  workers.  Men  are  not  bargained  with 
individually.  A  fixed  rate  is  decided  on  or  other 
conditions  are  arranged  for,  and  a  blanket  order  is 
carried  out  without  variation  over  a  system.  As  has 
been  observed,  the  regulations  and  order  of  a  railroad 
and  of  a  state  are  applied  with  the  same  mechanical 
regularity  to  all  the  servants  of  each. 

The  Industrial  Workers  does  not  ask  for  union 
recognition  or  the  union  shop,  not  because  it  believes 
in  the  "  free  American  workman,"  but  because  it 
wants  no  recognition  from  employers  whose  rights 
it  refuses  to  recognize  in  the  ownership  or  adminis- 
tration of  wealth  and  its  production. 

Practically  all  the  unions  of  the  Federation  demand 


UNION  RECOGNITION  123 

union  recognition,  but  this  question,  as  well  as  the 
question  of  the  union  shop,  is  settled  by  the  individual 
union.  Unions  of  such  strength  as  the  Typographical 
make  union  shop  contracts,  while  the  Iron  Molders 
make  few  closed  shop  agreements.  As  one  of  its 
officers  expresses  it  .  .  .  "  it  is  the  duty  of  the  union 
alone  to  make  unionists  of  the  workers." 

Some  of  the  unions  adopt  an  opportunistic  attitude ; 
that  is,  they  graduate  their  demands.  They  include, 
for  instance,  the  union  shop  in  their  demands  only 
after  the  trade  is  well  organized.  It  comes  after 
demands  for  the  adjustment  of  conditions  of  employ- 
ment, as  it  is,  in  the  experience  of  unions,  the  most 
difficult  demand  to  secure.  Other  unions  make  the 
union  shop  their  first  demand,  on  the  ground  that  in 
their  weakness  they  need  the  assurance  that  members 
will  not  be  discharged  on  account  of  their  member- 
ship. If  a  shop  strikes  in  rush  season,  a  newly  organ- 
ized trade  can  frequently  gain  a  union  shop  contract. 
The  fight  to  hold  the  gain  comes  later.  They  realize 
this  when  they  make  the  original  demand,  but  they 
claim  that  the  securing  of  that  demand  advertises  the 
advantages  and  strength  of  organization  among  other 
workers  of  the  trade,  that  it  gives  the  workers  courage, 
and  is  good  propaganda  tactics.  This  is  the  well- 
known  position  taken  by  the  young  Jewish  women 
in  sewing  trades,  in  their  first  attempt  at  organization. 

It  was  the  wholesale  discrimination  against  union 
members,  and  the  use  of  the  blacklist  by  the  employers, 


124  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

which  led  the  Bridge  and  Structural  Iron  Workers  to 
make  the  union-shop  contract  the  issue  in  the  trade. 

The  strike  of  miners  in  the  southern  coal  fields  of 
Colorado,  called  in  September,  1913,  and  resulting 
in  a  war  between  the  miners  and  the  operators  of  the 
entire  state  before  May  of  the  following  year,  startled 
the  general  public  into  an  understanding  of  the  differ- 
ence between  union  recognition  and  the  union  shop 
and  disclosed,  also,  the  reasons  why  opponents  of 
unions  treat  both  as  an  abridgement  of  personal 
freedom. 

The  strike  followed  the  refusal  of  the  mine  op- 
erators to  grant  the  miners  certain  minima,  one  of 
which  was  recognition  of  the  union;  that  is,  that  the 
operators  would  consent  to  deal  with  representatives 
of  their  men,  who  chose  to  delegate  their  dealings 
with  the  coal  companies  to  officers  of  the  United  Mine 
Workers.  The  union  made  no  demand  on  the  mine 
operators  to  employ  union  men,  but  there  was  a  law 
on  the  statute  books  of  Colorado  which  prohibited 
employers  from  discharging  men  because  of  their 
membership  in  a  union.  This  law,  like  all  other  laws 
for  the  protection  of  Colorado  miners,  was  deliber- 
ately ignored.  The  operators  knew  that  the  observ- 
ance of  the  law  or  the  recognition  of  the  union 
would  result  automatically  in  the  complete  unioniza- 
tion of  the  mines.  They  claimed  that  only  ten  per 
cent  of  the  men  belonged  to  the  union,  leaving  it,  as 
usual,  to  be  inferred  that  the  other  ninety  per  cent. 


UNION  RECOGNITION  125 

had  freely  chosen  to  stay  outside  the  union.  They 
failed  to  explain  that  every  man  working  in  the 
mines  of  the  large  corporations  knew  that  if  he 
made  union  connections  he  did  so  at  the  risk  of  his 
job.  They  did  not  explain  how  it  happened  that  when 
the  strike  was  called  ninety-five  per  cent,  of  the  men 
struck  in  spite  of  the  protection  which  the  state  of 
Colorado  was  ready  to  afford  all  men  who  helped  to 
break  the  strike. 

The  mine  owners,  it  was  apparent,  had  good  ground 
for  insisting  that  union  recognition  and  the  union  shop 
were  in  Colorado  virtually  one  and  the  same  thing; 
they  knew  that  if  the  men  were  free  they  would  seek 
the  protection  of  the  union  against  the  exploitation 
of  the  company  and  the  anarchy  of  state  officials; 
they  knew  that  there  was  not  a  miner  in  Colorado 
who  would  not  prefer  to  work  under  the  regulations 
which  the  United  Mine  Workers  had  established  in 
other  coal-producing  states  rather  than  under  the 
conditions  imposed  by  the  coal  corporations  of  Colo- 
rado. As  the  strike  advanced  it  became  rather  difficult 
for  the  operators  to  convince  the  public  that  miners 
who  were  free  would  prefer  to  work  ten  hours 
instead  of  eight ;  that  they  would  prefer  to  accept  the 
report  of  an  operators'  representative  to  one  of  their 
own  as  to  the  amount  of  coal  they  mined  per  day; 
that  they  chose  to  work  ten  per  cent,  below  the  scale 
of  wages  fixed  by  the  unon;  that  they  welcomed 
restrictions  as  to  where  they  should  or  should  not 


126  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

make  personal  purchases;  that  it  was  their  pleasure  to 
erect  timbers,  and  hew  out  unmarketable  material  for 
the  corporations  without  pay.  A  representative  of 
the  corporations,  testifying  before  a  Congressional 
Commission,  assured  that  commission  that  the  Colo- 
rado Fuel  &  Iron  Company  would  spend  millions 
of  dollars  to  protect  the  miners  of  Colorado  and  other 
American  workingmen  in  their  freedom  to  follow 
their  preference  for  the  conditions  enumerated.  For 
reasons  which  did  not  seem  strange,  not  one  miner  out 
of  the  thousands  of  "  loyal  "  and  "  faithful  "  servants 
raised  a  voice  of  gratitude  for  the  proposed  protection. 

Before  the  strike  was  over  it  was  possible  for 
everyone  in  the  United  States  to  realize  once  and 
forever  that  the  operators  of  Colorado  fought  union 
recognition  because  they  knew  that  that  would  open 
the  door  to  the  miners  to  choose  freely,  and  they 
knew  what  their  choice  would  be.  They  also  knew 
that,  where  the  miners  had  freed  themselves  from 
the  domination  of  the  corporations,  safety  in  mining 
increased ;  that  higher  wages  were  paid ;  that  hours  of 
work  were  shortened. 

During  the  strike,  Professor  E.  R.  A.  Seligman 
asked  why  Colorado  mining  should  be  exempt  from 
the  generally  accepted  practice  of  determining  the 
working  conditions  of  miners  through  union  confer- 
ence with  operators.  He  called  attention  to  the  de- 
velopment of  the  practice  of  such  conferences  in  other 
states.     He   stated   that   during  the   sixties,  the  sev- 


UNION  RECOGNITION  127 

enties,  and  the  eighties  there  were  local  organizations 
and  local  strikes  in  the  bituminous  coal  fields  of 
Illinois,  Indiana,  Ohio,  and  Pennsylvania;  that  the 
demands  during  that  period  were  recognition  of  the 
union,  increase  in  wages,  decrease  in  hours,  abolition 
of  company  stores,  right  of  unions  to  supervise  the 
weighing  of  the  coal  mined.  These  demands,  the 
same  as  those  the  miners  were  making  in  Colorado 
in  19 1 4,  were  finally  secured,  and  collective  bargaining 
was  established.  In  1894  a  general  business  de- 
pression interrupted  contractural  relations  between 
miners  and  operators,  and  in  the  first  general  strike 
occurring  at  that  time  the  miners  lost  ground.  In  the 
second  general  strike,  in  1897,  interstate  joint  confer- 
ences with  the  operators  were  secured,  together  with 
the  eight-hour  day,  an  increase  in  wages,  and  a  sys- 
tem for  settling  disputes  over  interpretations  of  con- 
tracts. In  1899-1900,  in  the  coal  fields  of  Missouri, 
Kansas,  Arkansas,  Oklahoma,  and  Texas,  a  strike  re- 
sulted in  the  recognition  of  the  union,  the  establish- 
ment of  a  scale  of  wages,  the  inauguration  of  another 
interstate  joint  conference.  Between  1899-1914  sys- 
tems of  joint  agreements  extended  to  Kentucky,  Ten- 
nessee, West  Virginia,  Michigan,  Iowa,  Wyoming, 
Montana,  Washington,  and  British  Columbia.  It  is 
against  a  union  with  such  a  regard  for  establishing 
collective  bargaining  that  the  coal  operators  of  Colo- 
rado have  waged  their  war  and  for  the  extinction  of 
the  union  have  defied  the  laws  of  the  state. 


128  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  strike  of  the  cloak  makers  in  New  York  in  igio 
resulted  in  popularizing  a  modification  of  the  idea  of 
the  union  shop.  As  a  compromise  proposition  an 
agreement  based  on  a  preferential  shop  was  adopted. 
In  a  preferential  shop  an  employer  agrees  to  give 
preference  to  union  members.  As  a  matter  of  fact, 
the  preferential  shop  is  the  union  shop  where  a  union 
is  strong  and  it  is  an  open  shop  where  the  union 
is  weak. 


CHAPTER  IX 
THE  UNION  LABEL 

Purpose  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  label — Ground  of  employers'  accept- 
ance— Claims  for  the  label  as  a  method  of  organization — 
As  used  by  the  Boot  and  Shoe  Workers'  Union — Why  it  is 
successful  in  some  trades  and  not  in  others — Not  a  business 
proposition,  but  a  moral  obligation — Inter-union  label  diffi- 
culties— Ethical  and  educational  proposition. 

The  use  of  a  label  as  a  union  emblem  is  advocated 
by  both  the  American  Federation  and  the  Industrial 
Workers.  It  has  not  been  developed  by  the  latter 
organization,  but  it  has  been  put  to  the  test  as  a 
method  of  organization  by  the  Federation. 

Its  purpose  in  the  hands  of  the  Federation  is  to 
give  an  opportunity  to  every  man  and  woman  as  a 
consumer  to  uphold  the  organizations  of  the  Federa- 
tion by  demanding  union-label  goods. 

The  label  is  a  guarantee  to  the  interested  consumer 
that  the  goods  he  purchases  are  made  under  union 
conditions,  mutually  agreed  to  by  the  employer  and 
the  union.  In  exchange  for  these  concessions  to 
the  workers,  the  union  promises  the  employer  to 
encourage  the  patronage  of  union  members  and 
friends. 

The  label  agreement  may  follow  or  precede  the 
organization  of  workers  in  a  shop.     That  is,  an  em- 

129 


130  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ployer  may  find  himself  with  his  shop  full  of  union 
workers  and  not  in  a  position  to  get  non-union  mem- 
bers. Under  such  circumstances  he  may  then  con- 
sider that  he  cannot  afford  to  refuse  the  workers  the 
conditions  demanded  by  the  union,  and  he  may  accept 
the  use  of  the  proffered  label  if  it  seems  to  him  an 
advantage  to  do  so.  Or,  where  there  is  an  organ- 
ization, a  union  official  may  be  successful  in  convincing 
an  employer  that  the  use  of  the  label  will  increase 
his  trade.  In  such  cases  an  employer  will  notify  his 
workers  that  in  the  future  he  will  employ  only  union 
members,  and  if  any  wish  to  work  for  him,  they  must 
join  the  union  whose  label  he  desires.  In  the  first 
instance,  the  workers  created  their  own  organization. 
In  the  second  instance,  organization  came  from 
without. 

Workers  who  have  become  union  members  through 
their  employers'  agreement  to  employ  only  union 
men  rather  than  through  their  own  initiative,  may 
become  strong  unionists  provided  their  union  gives 
them  in  future  full  opportunity  to  take  part  in  the 
collective  bargaining  which  fixes  their  conditions  of 
employment. 

The  advocates  of  the  label  method  declare  its  su- 
periority on  the  ground  that  when  the  representatives 
of  the  trade  union  seek  an  alliance  with  an  employer 
without  first  approaching  the  workers  and  subjecting 
them  to  the  risks  of  labor  union  agitation  and  union 
membership,  the  hardships  of  strikes  and  the  blacklist 


THE  UNION  LABEL  131 

are  avoided,  as  well  as  the  development  of  class 
feeling. 

It  is  the  tendency  of  some  "  label  unions  "  of  the 
Federation  to  push  the  pure  and  simple  label  method 
until  it  supersedes  all  other  methods.  The  label 
method  of  organization  has  taken  precedence  over 
other  methods  in  the  Cigar  Makers'  Union,  the  Boot 
and  Shoe  Workers'  Union  and  the  Overall  Workers' 
locals  of  the  United  Garment  Workers. 

Certain  boot  and  shoe  manufacturers  have  adopted 
the  label  proposition  with  such  enthusiasm  and  con- 
viction of  self-interest  that  they  employ  members  of 
the  Boot  and  Shoe  Workers'  Union  in  the  capacity 
of  agents  to  advertise  their  special  brand  of  label 
goods.  It  is  usually  understood  in  union  label  agree- 
ments that  the  union  will  carry  the  advertising  end  of 
the  contract.  But  these  label  agents  are  sent  by  the 
manufacturer  throughout  the  country  to  preach  the 
label  method  to  union  men,  and  to  advertise,  inci- 
dentally, the  goods  of  the  manufacturers  who  employ 
them.  These  joint  emissaries  of  the  manufacturers 
and  the  union  are  exhorted  to  approach  capital  in  the 
spirit  of  friendship.  With  the  Boot  and  Shoe  Work- 
ers, the  label  contract  is  the  emblem  of  peace. 

One  of  the  officers  of  an  international  union  de- 
clares that  they  found  the  label  method  of  organiza- 
tion barren  of  results  in  their  particular  line  of  pro- 
duction. He  claims  that  the  label  cannot  be  success- 
fully operated  where  its  demand  depends  upon  pur- 


132  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

chasers  accustomed  to  a  wide  choice  in  a  particular 
line  of  merchandise.  To  illustrate,  women  are  in- 
spired to  purchase  clothes  quite  as  much  on  account 
of  the  wide  choice  in  style,  color,  or  quality,  as  in 
answer  to  the  social  requirement  that  they  cover  their 
bodies  or  their  own  need  of  warmth.  The  officer  of 
the  union  laid  down  the  general  proposition  that 
where  habits  of  purchase  have  developed  a  large 
market  for  choice,  the  chance  of  the  label  method  of 
organization  is  weakened,  if  not  lost.  His  position 
is  backed  up  by  the  experience  of  certain  other  unions. 
In  men's  clothing  the  label  has  succeeded  on  overalls 
better  than  on  coats,  on  electricians'  gloves  and  not 
on  ordinary  gloves.  It  has  succeeded  on  men's  hats 
and  not  on  women's.  It  has  succeeded  in  printing 
where  the  bulk  of  orders  is  not  dependent  on  the 
variety  or  style  of  type  a  firm  has  to  offer. 

But  such  a  test  as  to  the  practical  aspect  of  the 
label  would  not  be  accepted  by  the  label  advocates. 
It  would  not  be  considered  a  good  and  sufficient  reason 
for  rejecting  the  label  method.  No  reasons  could  be 
successfully  urged.  All  arguments  or  business  con- 
siderations are  turned  down  with  the  answer :  "  It 
is  the  duty  of  all  union  men  and  women  to  purchase 
goods  bearing  the  label  and  to  forego  their  own 
individual  preference." 

The  label,  for  many  label  advocates,  is  as  significant 
as  a  card  of  union  membership,  and  the  man  or 
woman  who  purchases  a  non-union  label  article  when 


THE  UNION  LABEL  133 

he  could  purchase  an  article  bearing  the  label  is  a 
near  relative  to  a  scab. 

Some  of  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  a  universal 
adoption  of  this  attitude  within  union  circles  is  well 
illustrated  by  the  position  taken  by  the  Musicians' 
Union.  The  musicians  insist  that  the  trade  unions, 
as  patrons  of  instrumental  music,  shall  employ  union 
musicians  only,  but  that  musicians  as  patrons  of 
musical  instruments  shall  be  left  free  to  purchase  the 
instruments  which  are  sound  in  tone  rather  than  in 
trade  union  production.  The  musician's  first  object 
is  to  secure  his  place  in  his  profession;  his  place  in 
the  labor  movement  comes  later.  The  metal 
polishers  retort :  "  On  what  grounds  does  the  union 
musician  demand  the  patronage  of  labor  unions? 
A  trade  union  that  employs  a  union  musician  using  a 
non-union  label  instrument  is  virtually  employing  a 
non-union  metal  polisher,  thus  violating  trade  union 
rules." 

The  label  method  encounters  many  practical  diffi- 
culties as  organization  is  extended  into  different  trades. 
Is  a  trade  union  man  observing  trade  union  regula- 
tions when  he  uses  in  his  work  tools  or  raw  products 
of  a  firm  refusing  to  employ  trade  unionists?  The 
difficulties  still  further  develop.  Is  a  trade  union  man 
observing  trade  union  regulations  when  he  purchases 
an  article  bearing  the  label,  but  parts  of  the 
article  were  manufactured  by  non-union  houses?  Is 
a  man,  for  instance,  observing  label  regulations  when 


134  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

he  purchases  a  union  label  shoe  with  a  silk  trade 
label  bearing  the  name  of  the  shoe,  if  this  label  was 
made  in  a  non-union  silk  factory? 

It  is  usual  in  meetings  of  trade  union  delegates  to 
hear  the  ethical  rather  than  the  business  side  of  the 
label  proposition.  A  union  man  knows  that  he  cannot 
put  forth,  at  least,  not  in  a  union  meeting,  the  excuse 
for  smoking  non-union  cigars  or  cigars  without  the 
label,  that  he  does  not  like  the  label  brands  of  cigars. 
He  cannot  excuse  his  non-union  label  shoes  on  the 
ground  that  his  feet  are  sensitive  and  that  the  union 
shoes  cripple  him.  Nor  is  he  free  to  choose,  ac- 
cording to  union  ethics,  the  bread  he  eats.  If  he  does 
any  of  these  things,  the  cold  shoulder  of  his  union 
label  brother  is  turned  toward  him,  and  he  is  re- 
minded in  unvarnished  ways  that  he  can  eat  the  bread 
he  prefers  and  enjoy  his  special  brand  of  tobacco  and 
wear  the  shoes  which  give  him  comfort,  when  he 
and  his  fellow  unionists,  through  strenuous  adver- 
tising and  purchasing  of  the  undesirable  label  pro- 
duct, prove  to  the  manufacturer  of  the  goods  he  pre- 
fers that  it  is  to  his  advantage  to  adopt  the  label  and 
settle  with  the  union. 

And  finally  it  is  claimed  that  agitation  for  the 
purchase  of  union  label  goods  educates  the  public  in 
the  beneficence  of  labor  and  capital  co-partnership. 
It  is  hoped  to  reform  the  public  as  well  as  the  members 
of  labor  organizations  in  their  capacity  as  consumers; 
to   transform   them    from    irresponsible   to   altruistic 


THE  UNION  LABEL  135 

purchasers.  With  the  realization  of  this  hope,  the 
interests  of  workers  and  of  employers  themselves  will 
have  become  one,  and  peace  instead  of  war  will 
characterize  the  labor  movement. 


CHAPTER  X 
THE  BOYCOTT 

Use  of  boycott  and  blacklist — An  A.  F.  of  L.  weapon — Buck 
Stove  and  Range  boycott — United  Hatters — Legal  opinions, 
decisions — A.  F.  of  L.  action — Legal  status  in  states. 

As  employers  use  a  blacklist  to  rid  an  industry  of 
workers  who  stand  for  the  organization  of  labor,  so 
does  labor  use  a  boycott  to  rid  an  industry  of  em- 
ployers who  are  antagonistic  to  it.  Both  are  war 
measures  and  retaliatory.  The  difference  is  in  the 
use  of  the  weapons.  Employers  use  the  blacklist 
secretly  and  never  admit  they  use  it.  Workers  use 
the  boycott  openly  and  through  it  make  a  public  appeal 
for  cooperation  in  a  just  cause. 

The  boycott  is  an  American  Federation  of  Labor 
weapon.  It  is  not  used  by  the  other  labor  organiza- 
tions. The  Federation  acts  upon  the  assumption  that 
its  cause  is  a  just  cause,  representing  in  the  last 
analysis  the  interests  of  society.  It  expects,  therefore, 
the  support  of  society.  It  bases  its  claim  for  this 
support  on  the  proposition  that  the  interests  of  labor 
and  capital  are  identical.  It  is  only  after  the  unions 
have  appealed  in  vain  to  an  employer  to  rec- 
ognize  the    natural   alliance   existing   between   them, 

that  they  turn  to  the  public  and  demand  that  it  with- 

136 


THE  BOYCOTT  137 

draw  its  support  from  an  employer  who  refuses,  first, 
either  to  recognize  labor  in  its  organized  capacity, 
or  in  the  capacity  in  which  it  can  function  as  a  partner; 
and  second,  to  allow  labor  its  rightful  share  in 
partnership. 

The  boycott  naturally  finds  the  strongest  response 
within  the  ranks  of  organized  labor.  The  great 
part  of  the  general  public  either  directly  sides 
with  the  employer  and  denounces  those  who  victimize 
him,  or  indirectly  supports  the  employer  by  holding 
aloof. 

The  power  of  the  boycott  can  be  judged  by  the 
energy  which  capital  has  dedicated  to  its  defeat. 

The  National  Association  of  Manufacturers  stood 
back  of  the  Buck  Stove  and  Range  Company  in  its 
determination  to  kill  the  operation  of  the  boycott,  not 
only  against  that  company,  but  in  all  industries  and 
whenever  found  in  operation  within  the  United  States. 
It  was  the  intention  of  the  Association  to  test  the 
case  of  the  Buck  Stove  and  Range  Company  by 
carrying  it  to  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  and 
there  having  the  boycott  declared  once  and  for  all 
illegal  throughout  the  country.  The  case  became  side- 
tracked in  a  contempt  of  court  proceeding  and  was 
withdrawn  as  a  boycott  case  on  the  settlement  of  the 
dispute  between  the  Buck  Stove  and  Range  Company 
and  the  union. 

Justice  Van  Orsdel,  in  speaking  of  the  boycott, 
says  in  his  decision  modifying  the  Buck  Stove  and 


138  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Range  Company's  injunction  against  the  officers  of 
the  American  Federation  of  Labor: 

Again,  we  do  not  assume  that  it  will  be  contended  that 
a  citizen  has  not  perfect  freedom  to  deal  with  whom  he 
pleases  and  withhold  his  patronage  for  any  reason  that 
he  may  deem  proper,  whether  the  reason  be  one  origi- 
nating in  his  own  conscience,  or  through  the  advice  of 
a  neighbor,  or  through  the  reading  of  an  article  in  a 
paper.  Neither  would  it  be  unlawful  for  such  citizen  to 
advise  another  not  to  deal  with  a  person  with  whom 
he  has  concluded  not  to  continue  his  patronage.  If  this 
advice  may  extend  to  one,  it  may  to  a  hundred ;  and  the 
thing  don^  will  not  be  actionable  so  long  as  it  is  an 
expression  of  honest  opinion  and  not  slanderous,  how- 
ever much  the  intercourse  between  this  citizen  and  his 
neighbor  may  operate  to  injure  the  person  against  whom 
the  advice  is  directed.  As  long  as  confined  to  a  mere 
expression  of  opinion  as  to  the  fairness  or  unfairness 
of  a  business  transaction,  it  is  not  actionable.  x 

The  Boycott  Committee  of  the  Federation  at  the 
annual  convention  of  1909  opened  its  report  by 
quoting  the  opinion  of  the  Federation's  president, 
Samuel  Gompers : 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  injunction  was  sought 
primarily  to  restrain  the  people  in  their  right  to  quit  buy- 
ing Buck's  stoves  and  ranges.  It  over-reached  itself  so 
far  that  the  right  to  freedom  of  speech  and  press  be- 
came involved.  However,  no  consideration  of  the  in- 
junction has  been  possible  by  the  courts  without  taking 
up  the  principle  involved  in  the  boycott.  We  have  al- 
ways held,  and  we  still  hold,  that  the  workers  or  any 
of  the  people  have  the  right  to  withhold  or  to  bestow 


THE  BOYCOTT  139 

their  patronage  as  they  choose,  that  they  have  the  right 
to  advise  their  friends  and  sympathizers  of  this  action 
and  of  the  reasons  therefor.  It  is  hardly  necessary  to 
state  that  in  the  case  of  the  workers  the  unfair  attitude 
of  the  dealer  in  question  has  always  been  the  reason 
for  withdrawal  of  patronage.  It  has  been  made  clear  that 
he  refused  to  pay  the  standard  rate  of  wages,  and  to 
agree  to  other  equitable  conditions  which  the  workers 
seek  through  their  organizations,  and  hence  the  with- 
drawal of  patronage.  The  boycotts  declared  by  other 
citizens  have  sometimes  been  placed  for  other  reasons, 
and  they  can  safely  be  left  to  a  defense  of  their  own 
actions.  I  only  wish  to  point  out  in  passing,  that  the 
boycott  is  by  no  means  a  weapon  used  by  the  workers 
alone.  It  is  one  of  those  inalienable  rights  which  are  at 
times  used  by  all  people.  The  right  to  withhold  or  be- 
stow patronage  is  one  of  those  things  which  can  neither 
be  enjoined,  forbidden,  nor  punished. 

The  report  of  the  Boycott  Committee  continued: 

The  wares  of  the  labor-boycotted  enterprise,  to  the 
eye,  are  made  up  of  the  products  of  nature,  fashioned  by 
the  hands  of  more  or  less  skilled  workers;  but  to  the 
individual  with  the  capacity  for  analysis  there  is  visible 
the  blood  and  innocence  of  the  child,  the  health  and 
virtue  of  the  woman  and  the  disputed  and  denied  right 
of  the  toiler  to  collectively  bargain  for  the  sale  of  labor. 
It  impresses  your  committee  that  the  opposition  to  the 
boycott,  when  it  takes  its  legal  form,  is  really  intended  to 
cover  the  economic  iniquities  of  affected  capital ;  to  with- 
draw the  attention  of  the  public  from  the  labor  exploita- 
tion, and  center  it  on  the  ethics  of  the  boycott,  as  wrong- 
fully expounded,  to  becloud  and  befog  the  real  issue  so 
that  the  unfair  producer,  the  enemy  of  his  own  class  as 
well  as  of  the  wage-earner,  may  be  free  to  continue  his 


140  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

industrial  piracy  while  the  consumer  is  sent  chasing  false 
gods  and  exploded  economic  theories.  The  protection  of 
the  law  is  sought  by  skilful  pleaders  for  special  privileges 
in  order  that  the  rottenness,  the  tyranny  and  the  horrible 
working  conditions  associated  with  the  boycotted  manu- 
facturing plant,  may  be  obscured  to  the  public  gaze. 
If  in  instances  where  the  boycott  is  now  necessary,  the 
right  kind  of  publicity  could  be  had,  the  boycott  would 
be  unnecessary,  for  an  aroused  public  conscience  would 
speedily  compel  the  manufacturing  and  the  selling  male- 
factor to  put  his  establishment  in  industrial  order  or  to 
go  out  of  business.  ...  If  an  individual  has  the  right 
to  enlist  the  sympathies  of  his  fellow  men,  and  it  follows 
that  if  the  two  have  the  right  to  refuse  to  patronize, 
then  labor  in  combination  has  the  right  to  refuse  to 
patronize.  We  say  that  when  your  cause  is  just  and 
every  other  remedy  has  been  employed  without  result, 
boycott.  We  say  that  when  the  employer  has  deter- 
mined to  exploit  not  only  adult  male  labor,  but  our 
women  and  our  children ;  and  our  reasoning  and  our 
appeal  to  his  fairness  and  his  conscience  will  not  sway 
him,  boycott.  We  say  that  when  labor  has  been  op- 
pressed, browbeaten  and  tyrannized,  boycott.  We  say 
when  social  and  political  conditions  have  become  so  bad 
that  ordinary  remedial  measures  are  fruitless,  boycott. 
And  finally  we  say  that  we  have  the  right  to  boycott  and 
we  propose  to  exercise  that  right.2 

Another  case  as  famous  as  the  Buck  Stove  and 
Range  Company  is  the  case  of  the  Danbury  hatters, 
or  Loewe  v.  Lawlor.  The  prosecution  invoked  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  law  to  aid  in  establishing  the 
boycott  as  a  national  conspiracy  in  restraint  of  inter- 
state commerce.  Judgment  was  finally  entered 
against  the  defendants  in  November,  19 12,  amounting 


THE  BOYCOTT  141 

to  $240,000.  The  attorney  for  the  Executive  Council 
of  the  Federation  appealed  from  this  decision,  and 
under  the  instruction  of  the  National  Convention  will 
carry  the  case  through  the  highest  courts.  The  at- 
torney retained  by  the  Federation  of  Labor  in  the 
hatters'  case,  in  addressing  the  convention  of  the 
Federation  held  in  Rochester  in  1912,  brought  out  the 
significance  to  organized  labor  of  treating  labor-union 
activity  as  conspiracy  in  restraint  of  trade.  This 
phase  of  the  problem  is  more  important  than  are 
decisions  against  the  boycott  alone,  as  all  labor-union 
action  is  conspiracy  if  conspiracy  is  to  cover  all 
collective  action  of  labor  which  interferes  with  an 
employer's  interstate  trade,  for  there  are  few  manu- 
facturers whose  sale  of  goods  does  not  cross  state 
lines.  If  the  reasoning  of  the  plaintiffs  in  the  case 
against  the  hatters  is  eventually  sustained,  practically 
every  union  activity  could  be  declared  illegal  as  a 
conspiracy  in  restraint  of  trade.  The  attorney  in 
addressing  the  convention  said: 

You  possibly  know  that  over  in  Danbury,  Connecti- 
cut, there  has  been  a  firm  known  as  D.  E.  Loewe  and 
Company,  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  hats.  Along 
in  the  fall  and  winter  of  1901,  and  during  the  spring  of 
1902,  an  effort  was  made  to  unionize  the  factory  of  D.  E. 
Loewe  and  Company.  Various  conferences  were  held 
with  committees  and  an  effort  was  made  to  reach  an 
amicable  adjustment.  Failing  in  this  effort,  on  the  25th 
day  of  July,  1902,  the  union  men  employed  in  that  fac- 
tory quit  work.     The  next  day  the  non-union  men  em- 


142  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ployed  in  that  factory  quit  work,  so  that  by  the  night 
of  the  26th  of  July,  1902,  that  factory  was  cleaned  out 
and  only  six  or  seven  men  remained.  The  matter  ran 
along  until  August.  Then  the  agents  of  the  United 
Hatters  on  the  road  began  to  effectively  advertise  the 
union  label.  They  called  upon  the  trade  wherever  the 
hats  of  D.  E.  Loewe  and  Company  were  sold  and  asked 
the  dealers  to  transfer  their  patronage  to  firms  using  the 
union  label.  This  condition  continued  until  the  summer 
of  1903,  and  then  Mr.  Daniel  Davenport,  the  attorney 
of  the  American  Anti-Boycott  Association,  began  two 
pieces  of  litigation.  First  he  filed  in  the  courts  of  Con- 
necticut an  action  against  the  officers  of  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor  and  a  number  of  individuals  of  the 
United  Hatters'  organization.  At  the  same  time  he  filed 
in  the  Federal  Court  at  Hartford  an  action  brought  un- 
der the  provisions  of  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act,  nam- 
ing as  defendants  some  255  members  of  the  Hatters' 
Union  and  drawing  his  complaint  so  broad  as  to  include 
each  and  every  one  of  the  then  1,400,000  members  of 
the  organized  labor  movement  of  this  country.  ...  in 
that  complaint  you  are  charged  with  being  parties  to  a 
conspiracy  carried  on  contrary  to  the  provisions  of  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  Act.   .    .    . 

The  complaint  charged,  and  had  to  charge  in  order 
to  give  the  Federal  Court  jurisdiction,  that  for  years 
there  had  been  a  conspiracy  among  the  members  of  the 
United  Hatters  of  North  America  and  members  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor,  the  purpose  of  which 
conspiracy  was  to  destroy  interstate  commerce,  to  de- 
stroy the  interstate  commerce  of  any  employer  who 
failed  to  agree  with  the  labor  movement  of  this  country 
in  the  policies  it  was  at  that  time  advocating.  I  take  it 
that  most  of  you  understand  that  if  you  live  in  New 
York  and  I  live  in  New  York  and  you  want  to  bring 
an  action  of  law  against  me  you  must  bring  that  action 


THE  BOYCOTT  143 

in  the  State  of  New  York.  The  defendants  resided  in 
Connecticut  and  the  complainants  resided  in  Connecticut. 
The  great  damage  sustained  by  Mr.  Loewe  was  not 
because  of  boycotting  proceedings  but  the  damage  he 
suffered  by  reason  of  the  loss  of  his  employees.  Under 
ordinary  circumstances  that  loss,  if  recoverable,  would 
be  in  the  state  courts  of  Connecticut.  In  order  to  bring 
that  element  of  damages  within  the  purview  of  the 
Sherman  Anti-Trust  law,  Mr.  Davenport  had  to  allege 
that  the  strike,  the  calling  out  of  the  men,  was  a  part 
of  the  carrying  out  of  the  conspiracy  to  destroy  Mr. 
Loewe's  interstate  commerce.  So  you  want  to  under- 
stand that  everything  done  in  connection  with  that  strike 
is  alleged  to  have  been  done  for  the  sole  and  only  pur- 
pose of  destroying  interstate  commerce. 

Now  you  have  a  strike  in  California  where  they  are 
engaged  in  the  manufacturing  of  products  that  are  manu- 
factured to  be  shipped  into  Nevada.  What  is  the  result? 
You  haven't  a  right  to  withdraw  your  labor  from  that 
employer,  because  if  you  do  you  are  preventing  the 
manufacture  of  goods  which,  if  manufactured,  will  be- 
come a  part  of  the  interstate  commerce  of  this  country. 
So  I  say  this  is  important  because  there  is  a  next  step. 
It  has  been  declared  that  hatters  scattered  throughout 
the  jurisdiction  of  our  Federal  government  may  not 
collectively  refuse  to  buy  non-union  hats,  may  not  col- 
lectively ask  their  friends  not  to  buy  non-union  hats, 
may  not  ask  their  friends  collectively  to  not  buy  the  hats 
of  Loewe  and  Company,  because  if  Mr.  Loewe  was  find- 
ing a  market  for  his  hats  in  California  or  Michigan  the 
hats  when  shipped  would  be  a  part  of  the  interstate  com- 
merce of  this  country.  So  I  say  the  next  step  is  to  pre- 
vent men  collectively  to  withdraw  their  services  because 
they  are  withdrawing  their  services  from  the  employ- 
ment of  the  men  engaged  in  the  manufacture  of  a  prod- 
uct that  will  become  part  of  the  interstate  commerce 
of  this  country.   .    .    . 


i44  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Now,  what  does  it  mean  to  my  organization  or  to 
your  organization  ?  It  means  that  if  any  officers  or 
group  of  agents  of  your  international  do  anything  that 
brings  it  within  the  scope  of  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust  law 
your  property  can  be  taken  away,  your  wages  garnisheed, 
your  bank  account  attached.  It  is  the  most  important 
question  you  have  before  you  for  consideration,  because  it 
is  an  attempt,  as  this  report  says,  to  say  to  organized 
labor,  "  You  cannot  afford  to  affiliate  with  your  union, 
because  if  you  do  you  become  individually  responsible 
to  answer  in  damages  for  what  that  union  or  the  mem- 
bers, officers,  or  agents  of  that  union  may  do." 

It  is  a  great  question.  It  is  the  first  time  in  the 
history  of  jurisprudence  in  this  country  that  a  man 
could  be  made  a  party  to  a  conspiracy  without  his 
knowledge,  that  a  man  could  be  charged  as  being  a 
party  to  carrying  on  a  conspiracy  against  the  law  with- 
out his  knowing  he  was  participating  in  such  a  con- 
spiracy. 3 

While  the  appeal  of  this  case  is  being  taken,  the 
Federation  decided  to  work  as  usual  for  the  amend- 
ment of  the  Federal  law  so  that  trade  unions  would 
not  be  classed  with  trusts  as  combinations  in  restraint 
of  trade.*  The  law  was  not  so  amended  in  the  1913 
session  of  Congress,  but  no  provision  was  made  in 
the  supplementary  appropriation  bill  for  the  prose- 
cution of  labor  unions  under  the  act.t  The  President 
of  the  United  States  in  signing  the  appropriation 
act  stated  that  this  exemption  would  not  protect  the 

*  See  Chapter  XII,  pp.  148-149. 

t  In  September,  1914,  Congress  enacted  a  law  exempting  the 
unions.  (See  text  of  section  of  new  law  at  end  of  chapter, 
P-  147) 


THE  BOYCOTT  145 

unions  from  prosecution  under  the  Sherman  Law,  as 
other  funds  were  available  for  the  purpose. 

In  most  of  the  states  the  boycott  is  declared  a 
conspiracy.  Missouri  and  California  have  upheld  the 
important  decision  handed  down  in  Montana,  that 
labor  has  a  right  to  combine  for  the  purpose  of  per- 
suading others  to  refrain  from  doing  what  it  decides 
is  to  its  advantage  not  to  do. 

Some  time  in  1907,  Lindsay  and  Company,  whole- 
sale fruit  dealers,  had  been  declared  unfair  by  the 
Miners'  Union  and  Trades  Assembly  of  Helena,  Mon- 
tana. This  action  had  been  endorsed  by  the  Montana 
Federation  of  Labor.  Circulars  announcing  the  fact 
were  sent  out  to  the  labor  organizations  of  the  State. 
The  Yellowstone  Trade  and  Labor  Assembly  referred 
the  matter  to  its  grievance  committee,  which  issued 
a  circular  calling  on  organized  labor  and  all  in  sym- 
pathy with  it  not  to  patronize  Lindsay  and  Company. 
As  a  result  the  firm's  business  was  destroyed  in  Bill- 
ings, Montana. 

A  sweeping  injunction  was  issued  and  made  perma- 
nent against  the  Montana  Federation  of  Labor,  and 
the  Yellowstone  Trade  and  Labor  Assembly  for  boy- 
cotting. From  an  order  refusing  to  dissolve  the  in- 
junction an  appeal  was  taken.  The  Montana  Su- 
preme Court  reversed  the  decision  of  the  lower  court 
and  dissolved  the  injunction.  The  opinion  declares 
the  boycott  to  be  legal.  Justice  Halloway,  writing  the 
opinion,  says: 


146  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

But  what  is  there  unlawful  in  the  act  of  the  union 
workingmen  of  Billings  in  withdrawing  their  patronage 
from  the  plaintiff?  Certainly  it  cannot  be  said  that 
Lindsay  and  Company  had  a  property  right  in  the  trade 
of  any  particular  person.  In  this  country  patronage  de- 
pends upon  good  will,  and  we  do  not  think  that  it  will  be 
contended  by  any  one  that  it  was  wrongful  or  unlawful, 
or  violated  any  right  of  the  plaintiff  company,  for  any 
particular  individual  in  Billings  to  withdraw  his  patron- 
age from  Lindsay  and  Company,  or  from  any  other  con- 
cern which  might  be  doing  business  with  that  company, 
and  that,  too,  without  regard  to  his  reason  for  doing  so. 
But  there  can  be  found  running  through  our  legal  litera- 
ture many  remarkable  statements  that  an  act  perfectly 
lawful  when  done  by  one  person  becomes  by  some  sort 
of  legerdemain  criminal  when  done  by  two  or  more 
persons  acting  in  concert,  and  this  upon  the  theory  that 
the  concerted  action  amounts  to  a  conspiracy.  But  with 
this  doctrine  we  do  not  agree.  If  an  individual  is  clothed 
with  a  right  when  acting  alone,  he  does  not  lose  such 
right  merely  by  acting  with  others,  each  of  whom  is 
clothed  with  the  same  right.  If  the  act  done  is  lawful, 
the  combination  of  several  persons  to  commit  it  does  not 
render  it  unlawful.  In  other  words,  the  mere  combina- 
tion of  action  is  not  an  element  which  gives  character 
to  the  act.  It  is  the  illegality  of  the  purpose  to  be  ac- 
complished, or  the  illegal  means  used  in  furtherance  of 
the  purpose,  which  makes  the  act  illegal.  (Ency.  Law, 
(2nd  Ed.)  Bohn  Mfg.  Co.  v.  Hollis,  54  Minn.  223,  55  N. 
W.  119.)  "A  conspiracy  is  a  combination  of  two  or 
more  persons  by  some  concerted  action  to  accomplish  a 
criminal  or  unlawful  purpose  or  to  accomplish  a  pur- 
pose, not  in  itself  criminal  or  unlawful,  by  criminal  or 
unlawful  means.  .  .  ."  We  hold,  then,  that  a  labor  or- 
ganization may  employ  the  boycott  as  herein  defined  in 
furtherance  of  the  object  of  its  existence.4 


THE  BOYCOTT  147 

This  doctrine  has  been  upheld  by  the  courts  of 
Missouri  and  California  and  at  one  time  in  New 
York.  With  these  exceptions  the  boycott  is  declared 
a  conspiracy  in  other  states.  While  the  courts  distin- 
guish between  primary  and  secondary  boycotts  the 
unions  recognize  no  difference  between  concerted  vol- 
untary acts  of  men  within  one  group  and  the  con- 
certed acts  of  men  of  several  groups. 

Note. —  (See  p.  144.)  The  section  of  the  federal  statute  ex- 
empting unions  is  as  follows : 

"  The  labor  of  a  human  being  is  not  a  commodity  or  article 
of  commerce,  and  nothing  contained  in  the  anti-trust  laws 
shall  be  construed  to  forbid  the  existence  and  operation  of 
labor,  agricultural,  or  horticultural  organizations,  instituted  for 
the  purposes  of  mutual  help  and  not  having  capital  stock  or 
conducted  for  profit,  or  to  forbid  or  restrain  individual  mem- 
bers of  such  organization  from  lawfully  carrying  out  the 
legitimate  objects  thereof;  nor  shall  such  organization,  or  the 
members  thereof,  be  held  or  construed  to  be  illegal  combina- 
tions or  conspiracies  in  restraint  of  trade,  under  the  anti-trust 
laws." 


CHAPTER  XI 
ARBITRATION 

Voluntary  and  compulsory — Opposing  position  of  labor  and  capi- 
tal— Erdman  Act — Engineers'  arbitration  board,  its  recom- 
mendation of  wage  board,  minority  opinion — Amendment  of 
Erdman  Act — Canadian  Disputes  Act — Compulsory  arbitra- 
tration  in  Australia  and  New  Zealand — Right  to  strike. 

The  opposing  positions  of  labor  and  capital  on  the 
question  of  arbitration  is  but  another  illustration  of 
differences  in  objective  points. 

The  trade  unions  have  universally  welcomed  propo- 
sitions for  voluntary  arbitration  when  a  strike  is  on 
or  declared,  and  capital  has  opposed  it  with  an  answer, 
which  became  classic  some  time  back,  "  There  is 
nothing  to  arbitrate." 

Capital  has  welcomed  compulsory  arbitration  under 
certain  conditions,  which  labor  in  the  United  States 
has  universally  opposed. 

The  employer  who  declares  there  is  nothing  to 
arbitrate  is  the  same  employer  who  dismisses  also 
the  claim  of  organized  labor  to  a  voice  in  fixing  con- 
ditions of  work  with  the  curt  reply,  "  I  can  run  my 
business  to  suit  myself." 

The  trade  unions  welcome  voluntary  arbitration 
because,    first,    it    secures    a    hearing  for  demands; 

148 


ARBITRATION  149 

second,  it  forces  the  employer,  in  the  presence  of  a 
third  party,  to  assume  a  more  judicial  attitude;  it 
forces  him  to  explain  his  position,  to  discuss  terms  of 
employment,  and  his  right  to  sole  management  of 
his  business  is  opened  to  question. 

Voluntary  arbitration  may  or  may  not  carry  with 
it  compulsion  to  abide  by  an  award.  It  may  be  that 
workers  or  employers  agree  to  submit  a  question  to 
arbitration,  and  to  refer  the  award  back  to  the  workers 
for  acceptance  or  rejection.  This  is  the  usual  form 
of  arbitration  approved  by  the  unions  of  the  American 
Federation.  Or  voluntary  arbitration  may  mean  that 
workers  and  employers  voluntarily  submit  questions 
in  dispute  to  arbitration,  and  agree,  in  advance,  to  be 
bound  by  the  decision  of  the  arbitrators.  The  four 
railroad  brotherhoods  advocate  the  latter  method,  and 
have  adopted  it  as  their  exclusive  method  of  adjusting 
wage  scales  and  working  conditions. 

The  Erdman  Act,  which  reflected  the  attitude  of 
the  railroad  brotherhoods  on  the  question  of  arbitra- 
tion, provided  that  either  the  railroad  managers  or 
the  unions  of  the  employees  may  invoke  an  arbitration 
proceeding.  But  recourse  to  the  act  was  optional; 
that  is,  managers  were  free  to  lock  out  the  workers, 
or  the  workers  were  free  to  strike  without  resorting 
to  arbitration.  If  the  parties  in  a  controversy  re- 
quested arbitration  under  the  Act,  they  are  legally 
bound  to  abide  by  the  decisions  of  the  arbitration 
board. 


150  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

From  1907  to  1912,  sixty  cases  of  wage  contro- 
versies between  railroad  managers  and  railroad  em- 
ployees were  settled  under  the  terms  of  the  Act.  But 
when  the  Brotherhood  of  Locomotive  Engineers  in 
1912  made  an  appeal  to  the  Boards  of  Directors  oi 
fifty-two  Eastern  railroads  for  increase  and  standard- 
ization of  wage  rates  over  all  the  roads,  the  managers 
representing  the  different  boards  separately  refused 
the  demands,  and  refused,  also,  to  submit  to  arbitra- 
tion under  the  federal  law.  They  claimed  that  the 
three  arbitrators,  provided  by  the  Erdman  Act,  were 
not  sufficient  to  settle  so  important  a  question.  They 
proposed  as  an  alternative  an  arbitration  board  made 
up  of  one  representative  to  each  of  the  parties  of  the 
controversy,  and  five  others  to  be  appointed  by  the 
Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court, 
who  would  represent  public  interest.  The  Engineers 
resisted  the  proposition  for  a  time  in  the  fear  that 
the  majority  on  a  Board  so  appointed  would  fail 
inevitably  to  appreciate  the  position  of  the  workers. 
Their  fears  were  fully  justified.  The  Engineers  were 
not  granted  the  standardization  or  any  increase  in 
wages.     Instead,  they  were  granted  a  minimum  rate. 

The  important  outcome  of  the  arbitration  was  the 
nature  of  the  majority  recommendation  made  by  the 
managers'  representative  and  the  five  men  who  repre- 
sented the  public.  It  supplemented  the  beggarly 
award  with  the  recommendation  in  the  interest  of  the 
public  that  the  majority  were  appointed  to  represent. 


ARBITRATION  151 

It  discarded  the  idea  that  engineers  were  free  men, 
and  proposed  that  they  should  in  the  future  be  treated 
as  servants  of  the  public,  surrendering  personal  de- 
sires and  points  of  view  regarding  their  own  condi- 
tions of  work  to  the  desires  and  interests  of  the  public. 
The  Board  recommended  a  compulsory  settlement  of 
wages  by  wage  boards,  and,  with  the  creation  of 
such  boards,  that  the  men  engaged  in  railroad  service 
be  denied  the  right  to  strike. 

It  was  not  surprising  that  the  five  men  who  con- 
trolled the  Board,  together  with  the  managers  of  the 
railroads,  would  regard  the  possibility  of  a  railroad 
strike  as  an  incomparable  calamity,  and  would  fail 
to  realize  that  the  compulsory  terms  of  service  they 
proposed  would  not  be  endured  by  men  enjoying  even 
a  pretense  of  freedom. 

In  connection  with  its  recommendations  for  the 
establishment  of  wage  boards  in  place  of  free  and 
collective  bargaining,  the  Board  observed: 

If,  notwithstanding  the  existence  of  a  wage  commis- 
sion, the  men  engaged  in  train  service  struck,  the  ques- 
tion would  arise  regarding  the  legal  authority  of  the 
government  to  compel  employees  to  remain  at  work.  Is 
it  unreasonable  to  ask  that  men  in  the  service  of  public 
utilities  shall  partially  surrender  their  liberty  in  the  matter 
of  quitting  employment  so  that  the  nation  as  a  whole  may 
not  suffer  disproportionately?  ...  It  is  the  belief  of 
the  Board  that,  in  the  last  analysis,  the  only  solution, 
unless  we  are  to  rely  solely  upon  the  restraining  power 
of  public  opinion,  is  to  qualify  the  principle  of  free 
contract  in  the  railroad  service.     A  strike  in  the  army 


152  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

or  navy  is  mutiny,  and  universally  punished  as  such. 
The  same  principle  is  applied  to  seamen  because  of  the 
public  necessity  involved.  A  strike  among  postal  clerks, 
as  among  the  teachers  of  our  public  schools,  would  be 
unthinkable.  .  .  . 1 

The  attitude  back  of  the  recommendations  of  the 
Board  is  typical  of  arbitration  boards  created  in  the 
interests  of  the  public.  It  keeps  before  it  a  sense  of 
the  service  to  be  rendered,  and  loses  sight  of  the 
fact  that  service  depends  on  the  willingness  of  human 
beings  to  render  it.  If  there  had  been  a  possibility 
that  any  of  the  five  men  who  represented  the  public 
on  the  Board  would  in  the  course  of  time  become 
railroad  employees  themselves,  it  is  doubtful  if  the 
minority  report  would  have  been  signed  only  by  the 
one  man  who  represented  the  workers.  The  reply  of 
the  workers'  representative  in  his  minority  report 
was: 

When  it  is  contemplated  that  such  wage  commissions 
would  have  all  the  powers  of  a  Court  in  determining  a 
labor  controversy,  at  least  equal  power  with  the  Inter- 
state Commerce  Commission  in  the  determination  of 
transportation  rates,  with  which  it  is  here  compared,  we 
strike  at  a  vital  and  fundamental  principle  affecting  the 
legal  and  economic  rights  of  railway  employees.  No 
fault  can  be  found  with  the  public's  interest  in  keeping 
open  the  arteries  of  commerce ;  indeed,  the  railway  is 
an  essential  part  of  our  modern  civilization.  It  is  dedi- 
cated to  the  public  use,  and  the  laws  regulating  it  in  the 
public  interest  are  now  an  established  policy.  But  with 
all  this  railways  are  privately  owned,  and  the  relation 


ARBITRATION  153 

of  the  railway  employee  to  his  employer  is  private  and 
not  public.  Whatever  relation  the  railway  employee 
may  have  to  the  public  is  secondary  and  through  his 
employer.   .    .    . 

The  fact  that  the  railway  employee  is  engaged 
in  an  employment  affected  with  public  use  confers 
upon  him  no  benefits  or  advantages  compared  with  em- 
ployees engaged  in  the  private  industries ;  on  the  con- 
trary, he  suffers  the  disadvantages  on  account  of  the 
character  of  the  service  he  performs  with  its  hazards, 
great  responsibilities,  and  many  other  exactions,  such  as 
age  limits,  physical  examination,  severity  of  discipline, 
and  so  on. 

These  conditions  make  necessary  the  organization 
of  railway  employees  for  their  own  protection  and  ad- 
vancement just  as  if  they  were  engaged  in  any  other 
industry.  To  take  away  from  them  their  present  indus- 
trial defenses  because  of  their  relation  to  the  public 
service,  simply  with  the  promise  that  they  would  be 
treated  fairly  by  a  wage  commission  or  other  tribunal, 
created  for  the  purpose,  is  wholly  inadvisable.  .  .  . 
There  can  be  no  comparison  between  the  fixing  of  a  rate 
by  a  commission  with  a  view  of  determining  a  fair 
measure  of  justice  between  a  railway  and  the  public 
and  the  fixing  of  a  wage  rate  between  the  railway  and 
its  employees.  .  .  . 2 

In  making  the  recommendation  for  compulsory 
terms  of  service,  the  arbitration  board  cited  as  a  pre- 
cedent the  regulation  surrounding  the  service  of  sea- 
men. At  the  1913  convention  of  the  Locomotive 
Firemen,  the  president  of  the  Seamen's  Union  said : 
"  We  have,  since  1904,  been  earnestly  and  persistently 
engaged  in  wiping  off  the  statute  books  the  last  re- 


154  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

maining  involuntary  servitude  under  the  flag  of  Uncle 
Sam.  Once  take  it  off  our  backs,  and  it  will  never 
be  placed  upon  anybody  else's  back  in  this  coun- 
try." 3 

The  demands  of  the  other  Railway  Brotherhoods 
which  followed  in  the  succeeding  months  for  new 
wage  agreements  were  met  by  the  managers  with  the 
answer  that  they  would  not  arbitrate  as  formerly 
under  the  Erdman  Act,  but  would  refer  the  demands 
to  a  Board  similar  in  personnel  to  the  Board  which 
had  decided  the  case  of  the  Engineers. 

The  other  Brotherhoods,  profiting  by  the  fate  of 
the  Engineers,  refused.  But  they  consented  to  the 
Newlands  amendment  of  the  Erdman  Act,  in  July, 
1 9 1 3,  which  provides  for  a  possible  increase  in  the 
number  of  arbitrators;  that  is,  two  railroad  managers 
in  place  of  one,  two  union  representatives  in  place 
of  one,  and  two  representing  the  public.  With  two 
men  instead  of  one  representing  the  public,  the 
chances  of  subserving  the  public  interest  are  more 
than  doubled.  With  two,  there  is  opportunity  for 
concerted  action  in  pushing  the  claims  of  a  great 
public  against  the  interests  of  a  group  of  workers. 
This  is  especially  true  in  railroad  service.  Concession 
to  the  demands  of  railroad  workers  for  decent  con- 
ditions would  involve  the  roads  in  a  colossal  expen- 
diture inconsistent  with  all  precedent  for  railroad 
financing.  The  chances,  therefore,  of  the  managers 
for  a  settlement  favorable  to  them  are  increased  with 


ARBITRATION  155 

the  increased  representation  of  the  public  on  arbitra- 
tion boards. 

The  Newlands  Amendment  creates  a  Commissioner 
of  Mediation  who  is  the  chairman  of  a  newly  created 
Board  of  Mediation.  The  chairman  and  two  federal 
officials,  appointed  by  the  President  of  the  United 
States,  make  up  the  Board.  The  Board  may  act  on 
its  own  volition.  If  it  fails  to  bring  the  contending 
factions  to  an  agreement  the  latter  decide  whether 
they  will  submit  the  matter  to  arbitration  under  the 
Act  and  whether  the  Arbitration  Board  shall  be  com- 
posed of  three  or  six  members.  It  was  on  account 
of  the  refusal  of  the  roads  to  arbitrate  the  demands 
of  the  trainmen  and  conductors  under  the  provisions 
of  the  old  act  requiring  only  three  arbitrators  that 
the  law  was  amended  and  the  possibility  of  increasing 
the  number  of  arbitrators,  particularly  the  number 
representing  the  public,  was  provided  for. 

The  result  of  increasing  public  representation  on 
arbitration  boards  and  emphasizing  the  public  interest 
is  understood  in  countries  where  compulsory  arbitra- 
tion is  in  practice.  The  public  is  interested  in  the 
prevention  of  strikes  and  the  prevention  of  strikes  is 
the  purpose  of  compulsory  arbitration. 

In  Canada  the  effort  to  prevent  strikes  through 
compulsory  arbitration  is  being  tried  out  in  a  new 
form.  The  Canadian  Disputes  Act  does  not  make 
strikes  illegal;  it  makes  it  illegal  to  strike  successfully. 
The  Act  provides  that  workers  before  striking  must 


156  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

submit  their  demands  to  a  government  board  for  in- 
vestigation and  report;  that  they  must  submit  the 
demands  thirty  days  in  advance  of  the  day  they  pro- 
pose to  call  the  strike;  and  that  the  workers  must 
continue  at  work  during  the  investigation.  Any 
strike,  called  before  the  Board  makes  its  report,  is 
illegal.  This  means,  to  every  one  who  knows  any- 
thing about  the  calling  of  a  strike,  that  the  provision 
serves  the  excellent  purpose  from  the  employer's 
point  of  view  of  allowing  him  ample  time  to  prepare 
for  a  strike,  to  stock  up,  to  engage  strike-breakers,  and 
arrange  his  business  affairs  for  a  comfortable  and 
possibly  a  profitable  shut-down.  In  short,  the  loss 
of  the  strike,  from  the  worker's  point  of  view,  is  fully 
assured. 

The  irony  of  the  Act  is  reserved  for  the  last  pro- 
vision. After  the  Board  has  made  its  investigation, 
has  made  its  report  and  its  recommendation,  after 
it  has  used  all  the  influence  it  can  summon  to  induce 
the  workers  to  accept  the  award,  then  the  workers 
may,  if  they  choose,  go  out  on  strike.  The  workers 
are  between  the  devil  and  the  deep  sea  by  that  time. 
The  wind  has  been  taken  out  of  their  strike;  any 
revolt  at  so  late  a  day  is  doomed  to  failure.  If  in 
desperation  they  accept  the  award,  they  are  legally 
bound  to  observe  the  terms  laid  down.  However  un- 
just the  terms  may  be,  they  cannot  change  them  by 
striking,  which  is  equivalent  to  saying  that  they  cannot 
change  them. 


ARBITRATION  157 

But  there  is  in  the  Act  still  another  piece  of 
hypocrisy.  It  not  only  permits  strikes  which  are  fore- 
doomed to  failure,  but  it  speciously  provides  that  em- 
ployers may  not  lock  out  workers  until  the  employers 
have  submitted  their  grievances  in  the  same  way  and 
under  the  same  conditions  as  are  required  of  workers. 
No  employers  are  seriously  incommoded  by  restric- 
tions on  lockouts.  They  can  effect  a  lockout  as  they 
can  blacklist  and  no  one  is  the  wiser.  They  can 
discharge  for  apparent  good  and  sufficient  cause,  they 
can  harass  the  men  until  they  give  up  their  work 
voluntarily,  or  they  can  close  down  for  business  rea- 
sons and  take  men  back  as  it  suits  their  convenience. 
The  conditions  surrounding  a  lockout  and  a  strike 
are  not  parallel,  and  the  provision  assuming  that  they 
are  is  false  on  the  face  of  it. 

The  Canadian  Trades  and  Labor  Assembly  un- 
wittingly endorsed  the  Act  when  it  was  passed,  but 
at  the  end  of  three  years'  trial  they  are  agitating  for 
its  repeal. 

Compulsory  terms  of  service,  that  is,  compulsory 
arbitration,  has  been  tried  in  Australia  and  in  New 
Zealand.  In  the  opinion  of  many  labor  unionists, 
it  has  failed.  It  was  found  in  those  countries  that  it 
was  impossible  to  punish  men  for  failure  to  abide 
by  compulsory  awards.  Jailing  several  hundred  or 
thousands  of  men  was  quite  out  of  the  question.  It 
was  found  that  fines  could  not  be  collected  from  men 
without  property;  also,  men  in  sympathy  with  con- 


158  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

victed  men  could  not  be  prevented  from  buying  up 
the  convicted  men's  property  and  returning  it  to  them. 
Many  labor  unionists  in  New  Zealand  and  Australia 
are  making  a  stand  on  the  right  of  all  men  to  work 
when  and  where  they  choose,  and  to  cease  work  in- 
dividually or  collectively  as  they  see  fit.  It  does  not 
appear  that  the  government  of  New  South  Wales  is 
satisfied  with  its  resorts  to  legal  pains  and  penalties 
in  the  experience  of  the  industrial  arbitration  laws. 
The  editor  of  the  American  Federationist  writes : 

The  Arbitration  Act  is  nominally  voluntary.  An 
organization  consisting  of  at  least  fifteen  members  may 
by  a  majority  vote  adopt  a  resolution  to  register  under 
the  provisions  of  the  act  and  thus  secure  "  governmental 
protection  "  for  trade  agreements.  The  quality  of  the 
voluntary  element  appears  when  it  is  observed  that 
organizations  not  registered  are  practically  outlaw  or- 
ganizations whose  members  may  be  bound  by  any  agree- 
ment brought  into  existence  by  a  registered  organization 
within  their  industry  or  district.  Here  lies  the  militant 
employers'  opportunity  to  exploit  the  workers — for  mili- 
tant employers  flourish  even  in  the  Australasian  Utopia. 

They  have  developed  a  series  of  "  arbitration  unions." 
Many  spurious  trade  organizations  have  registered  and 
secured  contracts,  which,  protected  and  enforced  by  gov- 
ernmental agencies,  bind  the  bona  fide  organized  work- 
ers to  conditions  to  which  they  do  not  consent.  Employ- 
ers have  found  little  difficulty  in  "  inducing "  fifteen 
workers  to  form  an  "  arbitration  union."  Nor  have  they 
always  troubled  themselves  to  secure  the  fifteen  required 
by  law — the  Australian  papers  state  that  six  men  or- 
ganized an  arbitration  union  for  the  coal  miners  at  Hunt- 
ley.    The  miners,  following  the  advice  of  their  national 


ARBITRATION  159 

labor  organization,  did  not  strike  but  joined  the  organi- 
zation. Although  some  of  the  most  reliable  miners  who 
had  homes  and  families  in  the  locality  were  persecuted 
for  taking  part  in  the  affairs  of  the  union,  the  bona  fide 
unionists  persisted  until  they  got  control  of  the  organiza- 
tion and  put  the  employers'  agents  out  of  office.  Im- 
mediately the  new  officers  were  discharged.  Thus  em- 
ployers work  under  and  by  means  of  "  ideal "  legislation. 
So  it  has  come  about  that  the  workers  of  "  a  Country 
Without  Strikes "  are  divided  into  two  factions — the 
"  lawful "  workers  who  abide  by  peaceful  agreements 
even  when  manipulated  and  perverted  to  promote  self- 
interest  of  employers,  and  those  who  are  seeking  a  new 
freedom  unrestricted  by  legalism  and  fines  and  imprison- 
ment for  quitting  work.  "  Lawful  "  workers  are  given 
the  support  and  protection  of  constables  and  militia. 
Legalism  has  created  impatience  if  not  contempt  for  law. 
It  makes  easy  the  way  for  radical  leaders  and  revolu- 
tionary theories.  .  .  . 

Opinions  expressed  in  a  recent  Australasian  meeting 
are  of  particular  interest  to  those  who  have  carefully 
considered  the  merits  of  the  compulsory  arbitration 
theory.  In  Adelaide,  November  nth,  1913,  was  held  a 
conference  of  the  representatives  of  the  industrial  gov- 
erning bodies  of  the  commonwealth.  Seven  hundred 
thousand  workers  were  represented.  One  of  the  matters 
considered  was  the  formation  of  a  Federal  Grand  Coun- 
cil, consisting  of  representatives  of  the  labor  councils 
of  the  Commonwealth.  The  delegate  from  Western 
Australia,  Mr.  McCallum,  objected  to  this  proposal  on 
the  ground  that  his  state  would  not  agree  to  giving  mem- 
bers of  Parliament  more  extended  powers  in  industrial 
matters. 

In  considering  industrial  legislation,  the  right  to 
strike  was  recognized  as  a  fundamental  issue.  .  .  . 

Mr.  Middleborough  moved  that  the  conference  enter 


i6o  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

its  protest  against  legislation  prohibiting  workers  the  use 
of  the  strike,  and  affirm  its  repudiation  of  legislation 
involving  the  imprisonment  of  workers  participating  in 
industrial  disputes.4 

The  purpose  of  compulsory  arbitration  is  the  pre- 
vention of  strikes.  Its  advocates  assume  that  the 
public  is  more  seriously  concerned  in  the  consump- 
tion of  wealth  than  are  the  workers  in  its  creation ; 
that  the  interruption  of  industry  through  strikes 
is  more  disastrous  to  the  public  than  is  continuous, 
indefinite  labor  under  compulsory  conditions  to  the 
workers. 

There  are,  indeed,  any  number  of  things  which 
we  discover  in  our  lifetime  that  other  people  consider 
we  are  in  duty  bound  to  do,  but  we  do  not  on  that  ac- 
count necessarily  do  them.  Whether  or  not  a  man 
will  perform  some  particular  task  must  be  in  the  na- 
ture of  things  left  to  his  decision. 

The  public  may  have  a  bad  time  of  it  if  steamers 
do  not  sail,  or  trains  do  not  run,  or  if  telephones 
fail  to  connect,  because  dockers  have  refused  to  load 
the  steamers,  firemen  have  refused  to  stoke  the  en- 
gines, and  telephone  girls  have  refused  to  attend  the 
switchboard.  But  no  one  of  these  workers,  nor  all 
of  them  together,  can  be  forced,  successfully  forced, 
to  serve  the  public  on  the  terms  it  dictates,  as  vital 
as  the  going  and  coming  of  the  public  may  be. 

Every  proposition  to  make  strikes  illegal  or  in- 
effective  is    fought  by   organized   labor  more  stren- 


ARBITRATION  161 

uously  than  are  all  other  measures  for  labor  regula- 
tion. The  most  conservative,  as  well  as  the  most 
revolutionary  labor  union  man,  believes  that  the  only 
defense  of  free  labor  against  slave  labor  is  the  unim- 
paired right  to  strike. 


CHAPTER  XII 
LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS  * 

Auxiliary  to  direct  action — Dangers  of  state  action — Warning 
from  Australia — A.  F.  of  L.  and  anti-trust  law — Bartlett- 
Bacon  bill  —  Restriction  of  immigration  —  Seamen's  bill — 
Democratic  political  measures — Congressional  measures  ad- 
vocated during  four  Congressional  sessions — A.  F.  of  L. 
state   legislative  measures  summarized. 

The  distinctive  characteristic  of  labor  unions  is  vol- 
untary association;  the  voluntary  association  of 
workers  among  themselves  and  in  all  of  their  in- 
dustrial relations.  When  unions  turn  in  the  pursuit 
of  their  ends  from  voluntary  association  to  state  pro- 
tection they  are  usually  prompted  by  some  event  or 
series  of  events  which  have  thwarted  their  voluntary 
efforts.  Their  legislative  activities  are  the  by-prod- 
ucts of  direct  action,  that  is,  of  collective  bargaining, 
trade  agreements,  boycotts,  strikes. 

As  the  courts  render  adverse  decisions  to  labor 
union  efforts,  the  unions  turn  to  the  legislatures  to 
secure  state  endorsement  of  their  position  or  needs. 
In  spite  of  the  mass  of  legislation  instigated  by  them, 
they  are  keenly  alive  to  the  dangers  of  state  action. 
In  commenting  editorially  on  compulsory  arbitration, 
Samuel  Gompers   observes   that  "  strike  after  strike 

*  See  also  Chapters  on  Boycott  and  Arbitration. 
162 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         163 

occurs  in  New  Zealand,  and  the  Australian  Common- 
wealth under  laws  providing  for  both  compulsory 
arbitration  and  wages  boards.  Experience  of  the 
workers  in  their  efforts  to  abolish  industrial  injustice 
has  demonstrated  that  this  legislation  is  ineffective 
for  that  purpose,  but  is  destructive  of  liberty  and 
progress.  The  important  element  in  securing  results 
is  the  spirit,  the  resourcefulness,  and  the  initiative  of 
the  people  themselves.  Nothing  is  a  substitute  for  in- 
telligent initiative.  Time  after  time  men  have  put  their 
faith  in  theories,  methods,  and  legislative  devices. 
They  have  found  all  agencies  impotent  to  secure  the 
welfare  of  the  people  unless  under  the  control  of  a 
people  able  and  alert  in  their  own  interests.  They 
have  found  theoretically  imperfect  machinery  produc- 
ing most  gratifying  results  if  only  permitted  the  de- 
velopment and  exercise  of  initiative. 

"  South  Australian  industrial  legislation  is  based 
upon  the  principle  that  the  government  should  take 
over  the  responsibility  of  securing  industrial  justice 
and  peace.  But  the  government  has  been  most  sensi- 
tive and  responsive  to  the  employers'  interests.  Em- 
ployers have  found  the  Arbitration  Act  a  legal  and 
effective  method  of  weakening  unions."  1 

This  attitude  toward  state  control  of  labor  con- 
ditions and  labor  unions  the  Executive  Council  of  the 
American  Federation  expressed  in  reporting  its  con- 
clusions and  recommendations  on  a  minimum  wage 
for  women. 


164  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

If  it  were  proposed  in  this  country  to  vest  authority 
in  any  tribunal  to  fix  by  law  wages  for  men,  labor  would 
protest  by  every  means  in  its  power.  Through  organiza- 
tion the  wages  of  men  can  and  will  be  maintained  at  a 
higher  minimum  than  they  would  be  if  fixed  by  legal 
enactment. 

But  there  is  a  far  more  significant  ground  for  oppos- 
ing the  establishment  by  law  of  a  minimum  wage  for  men. 
The  principle  that  organization  is  the  most  potent  means 
for  a  shorter  work  day  and  for  a  higher  standard  of  wages 
applies  to  women  workers  equally  as  to  men.  But  the 
fact  must  be  recognized  that  the  organization  of  women 
workers  constitutes  a  separate  and  more  difficult  prob- 
lem. Women  do  not  organize  as  readily  or  as  stably 
as  men.  They  are,  therefore,  more  easily  exploited  .  .  . 
an  industry  which  denies  to  all  its  workers  and  par- 
ticularly denies  to  its  women  and  minors  who  are 
toilers  a  living  wage  is  unfit  and  should  not  be  per- 
mitted to  exist  .  .  .  legislation  of  this  character  is 
experimental  and  sufficient  experience  with  it  has  not 
been  had  to  enable  us  to  secure  .  .  .  information  as 
to  its  tendency  and  its  effect  upon  wages  and  industrial 
conditions.  .  .  . 2 

When  Theodore  Roosevelt  was  president,  he  de- 
nied the  postal-clerks,  as  government  employees,  the 
right  of  petition  as  well  as  organization.  It  was  an 
object  lesson  to  labor  unions  suggesting  what  they 
might  expect  from  government  ownership  or  con- 
trol. 

The  most  important  legislative  measures  advanced 
by  the  Executive  Council  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion and  its  state  organizations  apply  to  the  de- 
fense of  labor  organization  and  labor  union  tactics. 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         165 

During  1913-14  the  National  Executive  Council  was 
largely  occupied  in  an  effort  to  secure  a  federal  statute 
which  would  exempt  unions  from  classification  under 
the  Sherman  Anti-trust  law  as  combinations  in  re- 
straint of  trade.  The  courts  had  so  interpreted  the 
law  in  the  case  against  the  United  Hatters  and  the  sup- 
pression of  their  boycott;  in  the  injunction  against 
officers  of  the  American  Federation  for  the  publication 
of  the  Buck  Stove  and  Range  Company  in  their  "  We 
Don't  Patronize  "  list.  Under  the  same  interpretation 
officers  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  and  of  the 
Western  Federation  of  Miners  had  been  indicted  dur- 
ing their  West  Virginia,  Colorado,  and  Michigan 
strikes. 

These  efforts  of  the  courts  to  so  construe  the  law 
signified  to  labor  the  dissolution  of  its  unions.  The 
opposition  fight  which  the  American  Federation  waged 
against  such  construction  was  long  and  costly  to  or- 
ganized labor.  The  position  of  the  Federation  is 
quoted  at  length  on  account  of  the  importance  of  the 
issue. 

Without  further  delay,  the  citizens  of  the  United 
States  must  decide  whether  they  wish  to  outlaw  or- 
ganized labor.  Only  a  few  months  ago  the  officials  of 
the  United  Mine  Workers  were  indicted  under  the  Sher- 
man Anti-Trust  law  because  they  helped  the  miners  of 
West  Virginia  to  break  the  shackles  by  which  the  mining 
companies  held  them  helpless  objects  of  exploitation. 
The  mine  operators  forced  the  constituted  authorities 
of  the  state  to  do  their  bidding.     The  miners  could  ap- 


166  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

peal  to  no  one  for  justice.  Their  only  defense  lay  in  their 
ability  to  enforce  their  rights  through  their  united,  or- 
ganized power.  To  strip  them  of  that  defense  is  the  pur- 
pose of  the  litigation  begun  by  the  indictment  charging 
that  organization  with  restraint  of  trade.  These  same 
officers  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  have  again  been 
indicted  under  the  same  "  anti-trust  "  law  because  they 
are  helping  the  miners  of  Colorado  to  resist  the  tyranny 
of  the  Standard  Oil  Company,  which  seeks  to  evade 
compliance  with  labor  laws  of  the  state.  The  "  in- 
dicted "  officers  of  the  miners  are  (call  it  "conspiring," 
if  you  please)  engaged  in  an  effort  to  rid  the  state  of 
Colorado  of  government  by  mine  guards  in  order  to 
reestablish  civil  government,  government  by  law. 

The  Federal  grand  jury's  indictment  charges  the  of- 
ficers of  the  miners'  organization  with  establishing  a 
monopoly  of  mine  labor  in  the  United  States  and  Canada 
and  with  organizing  a  conspiracy  to  restrain  interstate 
commerce. 

The  law  of  the  land  assures  to  workers  the  right 
to  organize.  All  who  have  any  knowledge  of  the  world 
of  industry  concede  that  without  organization  the  wage- 
workers  are  helpless  victims  of  the  industrial  forces  that 
are  seeking  their  own  self-interest.  Practical  men  of 
business  refuse  to  deal  with  a  weak  union,  for  its  agree- 
ments would  have  neither  advantage  nor  force ;  but  as 
a  matter  of  course  they  recognize  and  deal  with  strong 
unions,  and  adjust  their  business  to  conform  to  the  new 
situation.  It  follows,  then,  that  control  of  all  the  work- 
ers in  a  trade  increases  the  success  and  the  efficiency 
of  the  organization  in  securing  better  terms  for  a 
greater  number  of  workers,  and  in  turn  protects  the 
fair  employer  from  competition  with  producers  who  care 
not  how  they  grind  their  employees  so  long  as  they  also 
grind  out  profits. 

The  right  to  organize  is  a  sham,  a  trick,  a   deceit, 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         167 

unless  it  carries  with  it  the  right  to  organize  effectively 
and  the  right  to  use  that  organized  power  to  further  the 
interests  of  the  workers.  This  implied  right  must  be  as- 
sured. If  it  is  alleged  that  acts  in  themselves  criminal 
or  unlawful  are  committed  in  endeavors  to  effect  organi- 
zation or  to  secure  the  benefits  of  organization,  let  those 
acts  be  dealt  with  under  due  process  of  law.  But  in 
the  name  of  free  labor,  in  the  name  of  free  government 
and  free  society,  let  the  right  to  organize  never  for  one 
instant  be  menaced  or  withheld.  That  right  is  the  foun- 
dation upon  which  all  else  is  builded.   .    .    . 

Union  men  of  America,  do  you  realize  that  at  any 
time  your  home,  your  savings,  may  be  levied  upon  if  your 
organization  has  attained  any  degree  of  success?  Do 
you  realize  that  you  and  the  officers  of  your  organization 
may  be  imprisoned  for  daring  to  defend  and  to  promote 
your  welfare  and  for  the  exercise  of  normal  activities 
to  increase  the  power  and  efficiency  of  your  union  ?  Have 
you  compared  your  condition  with  that  of  the  unor- 
ganized so  that  you  realize  what  will  be  the  effect  of 
depriving  you  of  the  right  to  organize? 

When  you  have  seriously  considered  these  ques- 
tions you  will  realize  the  imperative  necessity  that  de- 
volves upon  all  men  and  women  who  labor — the  neces- 
sity of  securing  amendment  to  the  Sherman  Anti-Trust 
law  that  clearly  and  specifically  prevents  the  application 
of  that  law  to  the  voluntary  organization  of  the  workers 
— the  unions. 

That  law,  as  now  interpreted  and  applied,  consti- 
tutes the  most  serious  menace  to  the  labor  movement. 
That  law,  which  was  intended  to  benefit  human  beings, 
to  prevent  or  check  monopoly  and  absolute  control  over 
the  products  of  labor  and  of  the  soil,  to  assure  to  the 
people  the  necessities  of  life  at  reasonable  prices,  has 
proved  useless  in  establishing  control  or  regulation  over 
the  trusts  and  monopolies.    In  a  spirit  of  ironic  glee  these 


168  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

same  monopolies,  trusts,  and  corporations,  unharmed  by 
the  law  which  was  to  have  regulated  them,  now  turn  this 
law  against  the  human  beings  who  were  to  have  been 
protected. 

Is  the  conscience  of  the  American  people  so  dead, 
is  their  sense  of  justice  so  dormant,  that  they  will  tol- 
erate that  horses,  wheat,  hay,  sugar,  hogs,  shall  be  placed 
on  equality  before  the  law  with  human  beings?  .  .  .3 

The  bill  introduced  in  Congress,  known  as  the 
Bartlett-Bacon  Bill,  reflected  the  attitude  of  the  unions 
and  their  demand  for  a  recognition  that  property 
rights  and  labor  rights  were  not  the  same.'  It  pro- 
vided : 

Sec.  i.  That  it  shall  not  be  unlawful  for  persons  em- 
ployed or  seeking  employment  to  enter  any  arrangements, 
agreements,  or  combinations  with  the  view  of  lessening 
the  hours  of  labor  or  of  increasing  their  wages  or  of 
bettering  their  condition ;  nor  shall  any  arrangements, 
agreements,  or  combinations  be  unlawful  among  per- 
sons engaged  in  horticulture  or  agriculture  when  made 
with  a  view  of  enhancing  the  price  of  agricultural  or 
horticultural  products ;  and  no  restraining  order  or  in- 
junction shall  be  granted  by  any  court  of  the  United 
States,  or  by  any  judge  thereof,  in  any  case  between  an 
employer  and  employee,  or  between  employers  and  em- 
ployees, or  between  persons  employed  and  persons  seek- 
ing employment,  or  involving  or  growing  out  of  a  dispute 
concerning  terms  or  conditions  of  employment  in  any 
case,  or  concerning  any  agreement,  arrangement,  or  com- 
bination of  persons  engaged  in  horticulture  or  agriculture 
with  the  view  of  enhancing  prices  as  aforesaid,  or  any 
act  or  acts  done  in  pursuance  thereof,  unless  in  either 
case  said  injunction  be  necessary  to  prevent  irreparable 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         169 

injury  to  property  or  to  a  property  right  of  the  party 
making  the  application,  for  which  there  is  no  adequate 
remedy  at  law ;  and  such  property  or  property  right 
must  be  particularly  described  in  the  application,  which 
must  be  sworn  to  by  the  applicant  or  by  his  agent  or  at- 
torney. 

In  construing  this  Act  the  right  to  enter  into  the  rela- 
tion of  employer  and  employee,  to  change  that  relation 
and  to  assume  and  create  a  new  relation  of  employer 
and  employee,  and  to  perform  and  carry  on  business 
in  such  relation  with  any  person  in  any  place  or  do 
work  and  labor  as  an  employee  shall  be  held  and  con- 
strued to  be  a  personal  and  not  a  property  right.  In 
all  cases  involving  the  violation  of  the  contract  of  em- 
ployment by  either  the  employee  or  employer,  where  no 
irreparable  damage  is  about  to  be  committed  upon  the 
property  or  property  right  of  either,  no  injunction  shall 
be  granted,  but  the  parties  shall  be  left  to  their  remedy 
at  law. 

Sec.  2.  That  no  person  or  persons  who  are  employed 
or  seeking  employment  or  other  labor  shall  be  indicted, 
prosecuted,  or  tried  in  any  court  of  the  United  States  for 
entering  into  any  arrangements,  agreements,  or  combina- 
tions between  themselves  as  such  employees  or  laborers, 
made  with  a  view  of  lessening  the  number  of  hours  of 
labor  or  increasing  their  wages  or  bettering  their  condi- 
tion, or  for  any  act  done  in  pursuance  thereof,  unless 
said  act  is  in  itself  unlawful ;  nor  shall  any  person  or 
persons  who  may  enter  into  any  arrangements 
or  agreements  or  combinations  among  themselves  for 
the  purpose  of  engaging  in  horticulture  or  agriculture  with 
a  view  of  enhancing  the  price  of  agricultural  or  horticul- 
tural products  be  indicted,  prosecuted,  or  tried  in  any  court 
of  the  United  States  on  account  of  making  or  entering  into 
such  arrangements,  agreements,  or  combinations,  or  any 
act  done  in  pursuance  thereof,  unless  said  act  in  itself  is 
unlawful. 


170  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

People  may  differ  as  to  whether  it  is  logical  or 
illogical  to  distinguish  between  associations  of  capital 
and  of  labor  but  no  one  who  understands  the  opera- 
tions of  unions  can  doubt  that  their  classification 
under  this  law  would  result  in  harassing  and  con- 
stant litigation  if  not  in  their  actual  dissolution. 

From  the  experience  of  the  unions  in  the  courts 
it  is  clear  to  them  that  successful  coercions  of  capital 
would  be  met  with  summary  orders  of  restraint  from 
the  courts.  Practically  all  advances  won  by  labor  in 
every  new  field  coerce  capital  and  directly  and  indi- 
rectly restrain  interstate  commerce.  Under  such  cir- 
cumstances labor  union  measures  become  conspiracies. 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor  has  recently 
taken  the  position  that  federal  restriction  of  immi- 
gration is  an  important  adjunct  to  labor  organization. 
Anti-Asiatic  sentiment  of  labor  union  men  in  Cali- 
fornia has  contributed  in  a  large  measure  to  the 
change  of  attitude. 

The  American  Federation  has  also  included  in  its 
legislative  program  measures  affecting  the  interests  of 
certain  classes  of  workers.  One  of  the  most  impor- 
tant recent  measures  of  this  kind  was  the  Seamen's 
Bill,  which  provided  for  greater  safety  at  sea,  against 
involuntary  servitude,  the  increase  of  a  ship's  crew, 
and  a  standard  of  seamanship. 

Still  another  class  of  legislation  promoted  by  the 
Federation  relates  directly  to  increasing  the  demo- 
cratic control  of   the   government ;   direct  legislation 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         171 

through  popular  initiative  and  referendum,  the  recall 
of  officials,  the  popular  election  of  judges,  the  elimina- 
tion of  difficulties  in  the  amendment  of  the  federal 
constitution. 

Legislative  measures  to  improve  directly  the  eco- 
nomic conditions  of  labor  (excepting  government  em- 
ployees) have  not  been  of  such  vital  concern  as  have 
measures  affecting  organization.  For  the  improve- 
ment of  those  conditions  the  unions  rely  principally  on 
their  voluntary  and  collective  efforts. 

The  Legislative  Committee  of  the  Federation  re- 
ported the  federal  legislation  which  it  ha'd  instigated 
since  1906,  as  well  as  legislation  it  had  endorsed  at 
the  suggestion  of  others.  The  appended  list  illustrates 
a  progressive  interest  in  legislation  and  the  character 
of  the  state  protection  it  is  now  demanding.  It  will 
be  noted  that  it  was  instrumental  in  securing  enact- 
ments in  its  behalf  on  seven  counts  in  the  Fifty-ninth 
Congress ;  on  eleven  in  the  Sixtieth  Congress,  on  six- 
teen in  the  Sixty-First  Congress,  and  on  thirty  in  the 
Sixty-Second.4 

Record  of  Fifty-ninth  Congress 

Employers'  liability  act  secured.  Immigration 
laws  amended  and  strengthened.  Law  limiting  rail- 
road men's  hours  of  labor  to  sixteen  in  any  one  day  en- 
acted. Federal  investigation  of  industrial  conditions 
among  working  women  and  children  ordered.    Amend- 


172  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ments  to  Chinese  Exclusion  law  defeated.  Ship  sub- 
sidy and  conscription  defeated.  Anti-compulsory 
pilotage  proposition  defeated. 

Record  of  Sixtieth  Congress 

Employers'  liability  law  passed  substituting  the  act 
passed  by  the  Fifty-ninth  Congress  which  was  an- 
nulled by  the  United  States  Supreme  Court.  Compen- 
sation for  injuries  to  government  employees' act  passed. 
Child  labor  law  for  the  District  of  Columbia  en- 
acted. Proposed  reduction  of  wages  of  employees  of 
Panama  Canal  Railroad  defeated.  Proposal  to  waive 
contract  labor  provision  of  immigration  laws  in  Ha- 
waii defeated.  Efforts  to  establish  censor  of  publica- 
tions in  Post  Office  Department  defeated.  First  fed- 
eral appropriation  for  investigation  of  accidents  in  coal 
mines  secured.  Self-emptying  ash  pan  law  for  loco- 
motives enacted.  Law  enacted  disapproving  unfair 
personal  injury  act  of  territory  of  New  Mexico. 
Compulsory  investigation  of  labor  disputes  bill  de- 
feated (a  mischievous  proposition  intended  as  a  fore- 
runner for  compulsory  arbitration).  Ship  subsidy  and 
conscription  bill  again  defeated. 

Record  of  Sixty-first  Congress 

Employers'  liability  act  amended  and  strength- 
ened. Federal  employees'  compensation  for  injuries 
act  extended.     Law  passed  requiring  railroads  to  re- 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         173 

port  all  accidents.  Standard  equipment  act  for  rail- 
roads passed  (a  valuable  safety  appliance  measure). 
Federal  locomotive  boiler  inspection  law  enacted. 
Immigration  law  amended  and  strengthened,  relating 
to  deportation,  also  prohibiting  interstate  transporta- 
tion of  so-called  "  white  slaves."  Eight-hour  pro- 
vision included  in  act  authorizing  construction  of 
revenue  cutters  and  in  naval  appropriation  acts.  Postal 
Savings  Bank  law  enacted.  Bureau  of  Mines  es- 
tablished. Federal  Commission  appointed  on 
Workmen's  Compensation  and  Employers'  Lia- 
bility. Porto  Rican  legislation  enacted  provid- 
ing for  an  eight-hour  day  on  public  works,  a 
law  prohibiting  employment  of  children  under  four- 
teen years  of  age,  and  an  employers'  liability  law. 
Amendment  to  Constitution  providing  for  income  tax 
passed.  Law  enacted  compelling  publicity  of  political 
campaign  contributions.  Child  labor  law  for  the  Dis- 
trict of  Columbia  amended  and  strengthened.  Rules 
of  House  of  Representatives  amended  hindering  the 
practice  of  smothering  legislation  in  committee. 

Record  of  Sixty-second  Congress 

"  Gag  "  rule  abolished ;  rights  of  hearing,  petition, 
and  association  restored  to  post-office  and  other  civil 
service  employees.  United  States  constitutional 
amendment  providing  for  popular  election  of 
Senators     passed.       General     eight-hour     day     bill 


174  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

on  contracts  for  public  work  enacted;  eight 
hours  in  the  contracts  of  fortification  bill  pro- 
vided; eight  hours  in  the  contracts  of  naval  bill  pro- 
vided; eight  hours  for  letter  carriers  and  clerks  in  post- 
offices  made  operative.  Anti-Phosphorus  Match  Bill 
enacted.  Children's  Bureau  established.  Extension  of 
Federal  Compensation  for  Injuries  Act  to  Bureau  of 
Mines  employees.  Industrial  Relations  Commission 
provided.  Second-class  postage  rate  assured  for  trade 
union  and  fraternal  publications.  Eight-hour  law  of 
1892  amended  by  extending  it  to  dredgmen.  Law  en- 
acted providing  for  a  Department  of  Labor,  the  Secre- 
tary of  same  to  be  a  member  of  the  President's  cabinet. 
Bureau  of  Mines  Act  amended  and  strengthened.  Sea- 
men's bill  passed  Congress,  vetoed  by  President  Taft. 
Immigration  bill  passed  Congress,  vetoed  by  President 
Taft.  Anti-Trust  proviso  passed  Congress  exempting 
organizations  of  labor  from  prosecution  under  Sher- 
man law,  vetoed  by  President  Taft.  Free  Smoker 
bill  passed  (in  interest  of  cigarmakers).  Physical 
valuation  law  for  railroads  and  express  companies 
passed.  Parcel  Post  law  passed.  Law  passed  estab- 
lishing the  three-watch  system  in  the  merchant  marine, 
for  masters,  mates,  and  pilots.  Federal  investigation 
ordered  of  the  industrial  conditions  prevailing  in  the 
iron  and  steel  industry,  also  a  congressional  investiga- 
tion ordered  of  the  United  States  Steel  Corporation. 
Increased  appropriations  obtained  for  rescue  work  in 
Bureau   of    Mines.      Public   construction   in   Govern- 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         175 

ment  navy  yards  of  naval  vessels  and  colliers  secured. 
Secured  five  cents  an  hour  advance  for  pressmen  in 
Government  Printing  Office.  Secured  10  per  cent,  in- 
crease in  wages  for  employees  of  Naval  Gun  Factory. 
Trade  unionist  appointed  first  Secretary  of  the  Depart- 
ment of  Labor.  Federal  investigation  of  textile  strike 
at  Lawrence,  Mass.  Congressional  investigation  Tay- 
lor "  stop  watch  "  system.  The  amendment  to  the 
Federal  Constitution  providing  for  an  income  tax  has 
been  ratified  by  three-fourths  of  the  States  and  is  now 
effective. 

The  legislative  program  of  the  state  branches  repre- 
senting one  year's  work,  1912-13,  gives  an  idea  of  the 
extent  of  the  legislation  and  the  demands  which  the 
Federation  is  making  in  different  states  of  the  coun- 
try. The  laws  supported  by  the  state  federations  were 
reported  to  The  American  Federationist  and  sum- 
marized : 

Workingmen's  Compensation  Laws  were  enacted  in 
Iowa,  Minnesota,  West  Virginia,  Texas,  Montana,  Ohio, 
and  Oregon ;  Illinois  redrafted  a  Compensation  Law, 
Kansas  amended  its  law.  In  California  a  comprehensive 
Workingmen's  Compensation  Insurance  and  Safety  Act 
will  supersede  the  enactments  which  were  in  force.  Ver- 
mont created  a  commission  to  investigate  the  subject  and 
legalized  compensation  acts. 

Employers'  Liability.  Liability  laws  were  passed  in 
Florida  and  Arkansas.  In  Maine  it  was  provided  that 
when  contributory  negligence  is  pleaded  in  case  of  fatal 
accidents,  the  burden  of  proof  shall  rest  upon  the  de- 
fendant. 


176  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Health  and  Sanitary  Laws  were  enacted  in  several 
states.  In  Iowa  frost  glasses  for  locomotives  were  made 
a  legal  requirement.  In  Montana  the  heating  of  vesti- 
bules of  street  cars  was  provided  for.  Legislation  requir- 
ing reports  on  industrial  diseases  was  enacted  in  Ohio, 
Maine,  and  Minnesota.  Laws  for  the  prevention  and 
treatment  of  tuberculosis  were  adopted  by  Minnesota  and 
California.  Furnishing  of  seats  in  certain  industries  was 
required  in  Arkansas.  New  York  established  as  a  divi- 
sion of  the  Department  of  Labor  a  department  of  in- 
dustrial hygiene.  Measures  to  prevent  occupational  dis- 
eases in  mines,  machine  shops,  paint  shops,  and  foundries 
were  adopted  in  Missouri,  Illinois,  and  Pennsylvania. 
Sanitary  conditions  in  bakeshops  were  regulated  in  New 
York  and  Minnesota.  California  provided  for  the  sanita- 
tion and  inspection  of  labor  camps.  A  New  Hampshire 
law  was  enacted  fixing  the  standard  for  sanitary  manage- 
ment of  barber  shops. 

Safety  devices  for  the  protection  of  workers  and  con- 
sumers were  passed  in  several  states,  such  as  the  Full 
Crew  Laws  of  California,  New  York,  and  Arkansas. 
Regulations  in  bricklaying  in  New  York ;  fire  escape  pro- 
visions in  Iowa  and  New  Hampshire ;  provisions  for  head- 
lights on  locomotives  in  Iowa,  Minnesota,  Colorado, 
Florida,  and  Illinois.  Minnesota  made  it  compulsory  to 
report  accidents  in  certain  industries  and  the  use  of  cer- 
tain safety  appliances ;  it  increased  the  width  of  the  clear- 
ing required  on  either  side  of  railway  tracks.  Pennsyl- 
vania made  it  compulsory  to  use  blowers  on  metal  polish- 
ing machinery  and  to  establish  regulations  for  plastering. 
California  prescribed  the  use  of  scaffolds  for  painters, 
telephones  in  mines,  signals,  hatchways,  and  headlights. 
Kansas  regulated  the  use  of  switch  lights  controlling  the 
movement  of  trains.  Massachusetts  required  safety  de- 
vices on  street  cars. 

Convict  labor  legislation  was  enacted  at  the  instigation 
of  four  state  federations.     Illinois  provided  for  the  use 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         177 

of  convict  labor  on  roads.  Texas  adopted  a  law  requiring 
the  use  of  the  label  "  convict  made  "  upon  all  convict 
goods  made  or  offered  for  sale.  Virginia  abolished  the 
contract  convict  labor  system.  Ohio  also  prohibited  the 
contract  convict  labor  system  and  provided  for  the  prison 
made  label  on  goods  from  other  states. 

Loan  shark  evils  were  minimized  by  the  passage  of 
laws  in  Minnesota,   Colorado,  and  Missouri. 

Mining  legislation  was  enacted  in  eight  states.  In 
Pennsylvania  provisions  were  made  for  hospitals,  a 
checking  system,  and  the  abolition  of  dockage.  Iowa 
extended  the  protection  of  the  Board  of  Health  to  cover 
mining  camps  and  provided  for  the  examination  of  gyp- 
sum in  mines.  Illinois  passed  a  nine-hour  law  for  min- 
ers. Kansas  required  bath-houses  and  regulated  the  de- 
livery of  powder  in  mines.  Colorado  made  eight  hours 
the  legal  workday  for  miners.  Missouri  compelled  the 
posting  of  notices  describing  the  conditions  in  inspected 
mines.  Ohio  regulated  the  right  of  action  in  case  of 
death  in  mines. 

Eight-hour  day  legislation  was  reported  from  five 
states.  Colorado  established  it  for  miners,  Missouri  for 
glass  factories  and  silica  mines,  Ohio,  Massachusetts, 
and  Oregon  for  public  works. 

Hours  for  Women  were  regulated  in  several  states. 
In  Montana,  Massachusetts,  and  Minnesota  nine  hours 
is  the  legal  workday.  New  York  extended  its  nine-hour 
law  to  include  women  in  mercantile  establishments.  In 
California  the  application  of  the  eight-hour  law  was  ex- 
tended. In  Texas,  Pennsylvania,  Vermont,  and  Rhode 
Island  the  week's  work  for  women  was  limited  to  54 
hours  and  in  New  Hampshire  to  55  hours.  Missouri 
extended  its  nine-hour  law.  Colorado  ratified  an  eight- 
hour  law  by  referendum.  Oregon  will  submit  an  eight- 
hour  measure  to  the  people  for  ratification. 

Mothers'  Pension  Laws  were  adopted  in  Massachu- 


178  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

setts,  Minnesota,  Pennsylvania,  California,  New  Hamp- 
shire, and  Ohio. 

Minimum  Wage  Laws  for  women  were  enacted  in 
Minnesota,  Utah,  Colorado,  Washington,  and  Cali- 
fornia. 

Child  Labor  Legislation  was  reported  from  six  states. 
New  Hampshire  fixed  the  employment  age  at  four- 
teen years.  Florida  limited  the  age  for  office  workers 
to  twelve  years,  and  factory  workers  to  fourteen.  It 
raised  the  ages  in  certain  occupations  dangerous  to  health 
and  morals.  Maine  prohibited  the  employment  of  chil- 
dren between  the  ages  of  fourteen  and  sixteen  for  those 
not  meeting  educational  tests.  Minnesota  limited  the 
age  of  employment  to  sixteen  years  for  occupations 
physically  or  morally  dangerous.  The  employment  of 
children  on  the  stage  under  sixteen  without  notification 
of  guardians  was  forbidden  and  the  employment  of  all 
children  on  the  stage  under  ten.  California  established 
an  eight-hour  day  for  miners  under  eighteen  employed  in 
certain  industries. 

Semi-monthly  Payment  of  Wages  laws  were  enacted 
in  Illinois,  Pennsylvania,  and  Ohio.  New  Hampshire 
adopted  a  bi-monthly  regulation.  California  regulated 
payment  of  wages  in  seasonal  industries.  Texas  regu- 
lated the  bonding  of  stevedores  to  ensure  the  wages  of 
dock  laborers,  provided  for  liens  to  secure  the  wages  of 
timber  workers  and  levee  workers.  Ohio  enacted  a 
mechanic's  alien  law. 

Private  Employment  Bureaus  were  regulated  by  laws 
enacted  in  California  and  Minnesota. 

Trades  Disputes  Acts  were  enacted  in  five  states. 
Peaceful  persuasion  law  was  passed  in  New  Hampshire. 
California,  Minnesota,  Maine,  and  New  Hampshire  made 
it  obligatory  upon  those  advertising  for  labor  during  a 
strike  to  state  the  existence  of  a  strike. 

Conciliation  and  Arbitration  Boards  were  established 
in  New  Hampshire  and  Vermont.     Laws  were  passed 


LEGISLATION  AND  THE  UNIONS         179 

providing  for  the  constitution  of  arbitration  and  concilia- 
tion boards,  when  needed,  in  Iowa. 

State  Bureaus  of  Labor  were  organized  in  Kansas  and 
reorganized  in  New  York  and  Minnesota.  Montana 
created  a  Commissioner  of  Labor  as  distinct  from  the 
office  of  Commissioner  of  Agriculture.  Ohio  provided 
for  a  state  industrial  commission  which  will  consolidate 
six  state  departments  and  have  power  of  inspection,  ad- 
ministration, and  regulation. 

An  Anti-injunction  Law  was  adopted  in  Montana 
which  provided  that  injunctions  cannot  be  issued  in  labor 
dispute  cases  when  they  would  not  apply  under  other 
conditions.  Massachusetts  enacted  two  laws  defining  the 
rights  of  striking  workers  and  restricting  the  issuance  of 
injunctions  in  labor  disputes. 

Direct  Legislation  was  reported  by  four  states.  Min- 
nesota, Washington,  and  Texas  adopted  the  Initiative 
and  Referendum.  Washington  established  the  recall  ex- 
cept for  judges.  Minnesota  limited  the  power  of  the 
courts  to  declare  laws  unconstitutional.5 


CHAPTER  XIII 

THE  CONFLICT  BETWEEN  LABOR  AND  THE 
COURTS  * 

Court  precedent — Creation  of  new  relations  and  institutions  by 
labor — Refusal  of  courts  to  take  motives  into  consideration 
— Defendant,  labor's  role — Position  of  unemployed  men  and 
the  court  position — Trial  of  Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers — Provocative  acts  of  Erectors'  Association — State 
disregard  of  Iron  Workers'  interests — A  judge  the  natural 
protector  of  vested  rights — Courts  of  law  do  not  claim  to  be 
courts  of  justice — Analogy  between  political  offenders  and 
condemned  labor  unionists. 

At  one  time  such  submission  to  authority  as  was  ex- 
pressed recently  by  a  negro  woman  brought  before 
the  New  York  night  court  was  expected  of  the  com- 
mon run  of  men.  The  woman  had  been  arrested  by 
an  officer  in  citizen's  clothes.  Without  explaining  to 
her  that  he  was  a  policeman  he  removed  her  by  force 
from  the  street-car  where  she  had  resented  the  insults 
of  a  white  woman.  Naturally  she  fought  against  her 
forceful  expulsion  and  for  her  freedom.  Some  hours 
later  before  the  magistrate  in  abject  apology  for  her 
resistance  she  said :  "  I  didn't  know,  jedge,  that  he  was 
an  offica  of  the  law  with  more  rights  than  me  ner 
anybody."  She  had  braved  the  club  of  the  man  but 
she  bowed  reverently  before  the  officer  of  the  law. 

*  See  also  Chapters :  Violence,  Strikes  and  Violence,  Legisla- 
tion and  the  Unions. 

180 


LABOR  AND  THE  COURTS      181 

Such  expressions  carry  with  them  comfort  and  reas- 
surance to  authorities  although  less  is  required  in  the 
interest  of  public  safety. 

All  that  law  and  order  demand  to-day  is  that  dis- 
satisfaction with  institutions  and  particularly  with 
court  decrees  and  administration  be  expressed  through 
the  courts  and  legislatures  as  constitutions  provide. 
This  requirement  presupposes  that  the  courts  and  the 
legislatures  are  susceptible  to  new  impressions.  The 
purpose  and  efforts  of  the  labor  unions  are  to  introduce 
new  relations  between  men  and  to  establish  new  in- 
stitutions and  new  codes.  The  courts  rest  on  old 
codes  and  old  relations  and  base  their  decrees  on  the 
precedents  established  by  previous  decisions. 

At  the  instigation  of  the  unions,  the  legislatures 
have  enacted  new  laws  to  further  the  union  purpose 
and  to  protect  the  organizations.  But  the  laws  which 
have  been  passed  by  the  legislatures  are  subject  to 
annulment  or  the  value  of  the  law  if  upheld  may  be 
lost  to  labor  through  the  particular  interpretation 
given  it  by  the  judge  who  has  no  understanding  or 
sympathy  with  labor  unions.  Even  court  precedent 
does  not  establish  for  practical  use  the  legality  of  boy- 
cotts, picketing,  or  trade  agreements.  Picketing  may 
be  legal  but  a  picket  in  active  operation  is  disturbing 
the  peace.  Boycotts  are  being  outlawed  by  court  in- 
terpretations and  a  union  as  such  may  at  any  time 
be  dissolved. 

But  labor's  particular  quarrel  with  the  courts  is  that 


182  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

they  refuse  to  take  motives  into  account  or  provoca- 
tions for  coercion;  that  courts  are  incompetent  to  dis- 
tinguish between  acts  which  are  inspired  by  selfish 
interests  and  acts  which  result  from  efforts  to  settle 
issues  of  social  significance;  that  new  issues  involved 
in  labor  disputes  cannot  intelligently  be  decided  on 
precedents  which  were  not  concerned  with  the  labor 
issue,  particularly  when  a  court  fails  to  distinguish 
between  working  men  as  human  beings  and  working- 
men  as  commodities. 

As  labor  unions  now  and  then  secure  a  footing  or 
recognition  in  the  community  they  have  presumed 
on  their  new  position  and  in  the  character  of  an  ac- 
cepted institution  turned  to  the  courts  in  the  role  of 
plaintiff.  But  it  is  significant  that  labor's  usual  role  is 
that  of  defendant.  Labor  knows  that  the  courts  are  not 
an  agency  for  the  setting  up  of  new  conceptions  and 
new  relations,.  But  when  a  labor  unionist  findsj}imsel.f 
in  the  court  as  defendant  ol_his^own  movement,  in- 
variably the  limitations  of  the  court  are  forgotten. 
The  propaganda  nature  of  the  defendant  rises  to  the 
occasion.  He  thinks  of  the  court  as  laymen  are 
taught  to  think  of  it,  not  as  a  court  of  law  but  as  a 
house  of  justice.  The  opportunity  is  seized  to  es- 
tablish the  great  truth  to  which  the  truth  of  the  minor 
act  for  which  he  was  indicted  is  an  unimportant  in- 
cident. He  is  obsessed  by  the  thought  of  a  new  oppor- 
tunity to  pursue  his  mission  and  he  loses  sight  of  court 
procedure,  and  if  he  is  reminded  of  it,  believes  that 


LABOR  AND  THE  COURTS      183 

legal  practice  will  give  way  before  the  presentation 
of  motives  and  provocations. 

During  a  period  of  unemployment  in  New  York 
City,  when  according  to  official  estimates  from  100,000 
to  300,000  men  and  women  were  out  of  work,  a  move- 
ment was  started  by  some  unemployed  men  to  de- 
mand and  if  necessary  to  take  food  and  shelter  where- 
ever  it  might  be  had.  Some  of  the  men  belonged  to 
the  trade  unions,  others  to  industrial  unions  and  some 
to  no  unions  at  all.  They  all  accepted  the  union  propo- 
sition that  it  was  harmful  to  labor  as  a  whole  for 
individual  men  to  work  below  union  rates  to  bridge 
over  temporary  periods  of  unemployment;  they  re- 
fused to  regard  labor  as  a  drug  on  the  market  and  sell 
out  at  bargain  rates ;  they  declared  that  they  were  not 
responsible  for  the  shortage  in  employment  but  that  so- 
ciety was;  they  demanded  that  the  community  regard 
them  and  that  the  men  regard  themselves  with  the  con- 
sideration which  men  deserved  who  were  the  victims  of 
industrial  fluctuations  created  by  society;  on  account 
of  certain  regulations  connected  with  the  city's  pro- 
vision for  lodging  as  well  as  inadequate  accommoda- 
tion they  demanded  shelter  and  food  from  churches 
and  other  institutions. 

Their  unbidden  entrance  into  a  church  brought  them 
before  the  court.  Their  counsel  undertook  to  explain 
the  situation  and  the  position  of  the  men.  The  magis- 
trate tried  to  make  clear  that  the  court  had  nothing 
to  do  with  the  fact  that  the  men  could  not  get  work, 


184  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

that  the  court  was  most  assuredly  not  the  place  to 
thrash  out  the  remarkable  conceptions  of  these  men 
as  to  their  rights ;  the  business  of  the  court  was  to  up- 
hold the  law.  He  gave  out  the  following  statement 
to  the  press: 

The  repeated  attempts  of  counsel  to  befog  the  issues 
here  and  create  a  prejudice  in  the  name  of  hunger  for 
these  defendents  is  inexcusable  and  not  in  keeping  with 
the  high  standards  of  practice.  The  only  issue  involved 
here  is  one  of  law  and  order. 1 

If  such  irrelevant  issues  as  conceived  by  these  un- 
employed men  were  admitted,  legal  practice  and  regu- 
lar procedure  would  surely  lose  something  of  its  prac- 
tice and  its  regularity.  It  is  difficult  to  realize  what 
would  be  the  development  of  a  court  of  law  which 
admitted  evidence  so  far  afield  of  the  mere  charge  of 
"  disorderly  conduct  "  and  "  unlawful  assembly  "  with 
which  it  was  in  the  present  case  alone  concerned.  The 
purpose  of  the  men  and  the  ideas  they  represented 
were  relegated  to  other  meeting  places.  As  the  friends 
of  the  men  left  the  court  at  the  close  of  the  trial  they 
were  saying  on  the  court  house  steps,  "  What  a  farce." 
It  is  a  common  comment  heard  on  the  steps  when  a 
case  against  labor  is  lost  and  closed. 

When  thirty-eight  union  men  were  tried  in  Indian- 
apolis on  the  charge  of  conspiring  in  the  transportation 
of  dynamite,  all  evidence  was  admitted  which  would 
tend  to  show  that  the  men  on  trial  favored  destructive 


LABOR  AND  THE  COURTS      185 

or  illegal  practices.  Such  evidence  it  was  supposed 
would  throw  light  on  the  character  of  the  men  and 
the  plausibility  of  the  charge  against  them.  From 
the  point  of  view  of  union  men  no  fair  judgment  could 
be  rendered  which  left  out  of  account  the  aggressions 
of  the  Erectors'  Association.  The  Association  had 
driven  the  union  to  a  fight  for  its  life.  But  all  material 
concerning  provocation,  all  evidence  offered  by  the 
defence  which  would  throw  light  on  the  practices  of 
the  Association  were  ruled  out.  In  the  opinion  of 
labor  unionists  the  provocation  warranted  at  least  an 
extenuation  of  sentence.  But  provocation  was  im- 
material to  a  court  of  law  which  was  concerned  merely 
with  the  fact  that  the  men  had  or  had  not  transported 
dynamite  and  on  the  proof  of  that  isolated  fact  they 
would  be  acquitted  or  sentenced;  sentenced  as  crim- 
inals bent  on  malicious  destruction. 

If  the  provocative  acts  of  the  Erectors'  Association 
and  its  character  had  been  admitted,  it  would  have 
been  shown  that  the  Association  in  its  efforts  to  stran- 
gle the  union  was  robbing  the  men  working  in  the 
industry  of  their  only  protection  against  a  wanton 
disregard  for  their  life  and  safety  exhibited  daily  by 
the  corporations  represented  in  the  Erectors'  Associa- 
tion. But  according  to  court  practice  such  evidence  is 
immaterial. 

The  disregard  or  disrespect  for  the  union  opposition 
and  for  its  grievance  against  the  Erectors'  Associa- 
tion was  carried  far  beyond  the  refusal  to  admit  evi- 


186  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

dence.  The  state  as  prosecutor  had  seized  all  the 
books  and  correspondence  of  the  union  and  gave  the 
Association  free  access  to  them  in  spite  of  the  fact 
that  they  furnished  the  Association  with  material  of 
inestimable  value  in  their  work  of  crushing  the  union. 
The  reasons  for  the  action  of  the  men  were  not  only 
immaterial  to  the  court  but  the  interests  of  the  union 
were  insulted  and  abused  in  the  progress  of  the  case. 
The  question  of  prejudice  of  judges  and  juries  is 
not  strictly  a  court  question.  It  is  a  part  of  the  eternal 
struggle  to  change  or  modify  public  opinion  and  create 
new  social  values.  Labor's  serious  effort  in  that  di- 
rection is  made  through  its  own  self-created  channels 
and  its  own  public  forums.  But  a  judge  of  a  court 
in  the  position  of  conservator  of  established  opinions 
and  customs  is  in  the  nature  of  the  case  the  £east  sus- 
ceptible of  men  to  the  labor  appeal.  He  is  the  natural 
protector  of  vested  interests  and  is  so  recognized  by 
capital.  If  a  dispute  reaches  the  stage  where  arbitra- 
tion is  demanded,  capital  is  usually  well  satisfied  to 
accept  judges  as  the  arbitrators.  Labor  invariably  ob- 
jects. It  is  discounting  imposed  limitations  of  judges, 
charged  as  they  are  with  maintaining  the  old  order, 
to  expect  them  to  render  labor  decisions,  charge  juries 
or  inflict  sentences  with  sympathy  or  even  with  under- 
standing of  the  new  assumptions  which  the  labor 
movement  represents.  The  free  use  of  court  injunc- 
tions is  due  to  an  ancient  conception  of  property  and 
property  rights. 


LABOR  AND  THE  COURTS  187 

If  labor  unions  should  come  to  the  point  of  regard- 
ing courts  as  courts  of  law  instead  of  courts  of  jus- 
tice (which  is  indeed  a  layman's  term)  considerable 
confusion  and  litigation  would  be  avoided.  With  that 
conception  well  established  the  unions  would  cease  to 
harass  the  courts  with  their  own  peculiar  ideas  and 
inadmissable  briefs.  The  courts  might  contribute 
toward  a  clearer  understanding  of  their  own  limita- 
tions if  they  refused  to  interfere  with  labor  opinions 
and  expressions  made  in  labor's  own  meeting  places. 
If  the  courts  liberally  interpreted  the  welj-established 
precedents  for  free  speech  instead  of  reversing  its 
own  rulings  where  labor  is  concerned,  labor  would 
learn  to  confine  its  defence  of  its  position  to  more 
fitting  places  than  courts  of  law. 

The  position  of  the  condemned  Jabox_unionist_and 
the  political  offender  are  analogous.  Xhe  offense  of 
the  labor  unionist  is  in  theinterest  of  aj^ause,  it  is  not 
personal.  Its  convicted  members  are  martyrs.  The 
deep  resentment  of  the  uniomstjsjy^ns^^^ 
largely  due  to  the  fajlure  of  judges  to  apprehend  this 
fact. 


CHAPTER  XIV 
VIOLENCE 

A  national  interest  in  labor  violence — Revolutionary  I.  W.  W. 
program — Lawrence  strike — The  McNamara  plea  of  guilty — 
Effort  to  involve  union  labor — Union  position — Dynamite 
conspiracy,  union  position — Violence  in  industry  and  of  capi- 
tal— State  violence. 

The  violence  of  labor  unions  became  a  topic  of  na- 
tional interest  in  191 1  and  1912.  It  was  no  new 
thing  for  the  enemies  of  labor  unions  to  accuse  the 
unions  of  violence  and  no  new  thing  for  the  unions 
to  repudiate  it.  But  the  violence  used  against  labor 
unions  befogged  the  effort  to  make  it  appear  that 
violence  was  a  distinguishing  trait  of  labor  unions. 
The  labor  disputes  of  a  year  including  thousands  of 
workers  were  themselves  important  testimonials  to 
the  restraint  and  discipline  among  union  men. 

It  was  the  sudden  emergence  of  the  Industrial 
Workers  of  the  World  into  a  position  of  importance 
and  the  confession  of  the  McNamara  brothers  that 
turned  the  charge  of  violence  both  of  labor  and  capital 
into  a  national  issue. 

Until  the  mill  workers  of  Lawrence  struck,  the  In- 
dustrial Workers  with  their  revolutionary  program 
had  not  been  seriously  regarded  by  the  country  at 

188 


VIOLENCE  189 

large.  The  success  of  the  strike;  the  consequent  in- 
crease in  wage  rates  in  the  textile  mills  throughout 
New  England;  the  effect  of  the  strike  on  tariff  dis- 
cussions; its  disclosure  to  the  world  that  the  woolen 
industry  was  parasitic,  thriving  on  the  degradation 
of  immigrant  families,  shocked  the  community  into  a 
consciousness  not  of  the  degradation  only  but  the 
power,  the  force,  the  violence  of  the  ideas  of  a  daunt- 
less and  revolutionary  union. 

The  effort  was  made  during  the  strike  to  create  the 
impression  that  the  strikers  were  intent  on  murder  and 
destruction.  What  else  could  the  intention  be  of 
leaders  who  told  the  strikers  that  the  mills  and  all 
they  produced  in  the  mills  belonged  to  them?  that  the 
owners  of  the  mills  were  exploiters?  Reports  of  an 
industrial  rebellion  in  Lawrence  drew  spectators  and 
representatives  of  the  press  from  all  parts  of  the 
country.  These  interested  citizens  heard  the  speeches 
violent  in  ideas,  but  reported  back  to  their  editors  or 
friends  that  the  violence  in  Lawrence,  the  physical 
violence,  was  the  violence  of  industrial  conditions  and 
the  violence  of  municipal  and  state  officials.  They  re- 
ported that  the  beating,  the  clubbing,  and  the  shooting 
of  private  citizens  was  not  done  by  the  strikers  but  by 
the  militia.  It  was  the  militia  who  brutally  interfered 
with  parents  who  chose  to  send  their  children  out  of 
Lawrence  to  be  cared  for  by  comrades  during  the 
strike. 

In  other  strikes  of  the  Industrial  Workers  it  was 


i9o  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  authorized  representatives  of  law  and  order  who 
were  convicted  of  violence  by  disinterested  citizens, 
not  the  strikers  or  their  leaders.  And  still  the  impres- 
sion persists  that  the  Industrial  Workers  is  a  violent 
organization.  Its  violence  consists  in  shocking  a  com- 
munity into  a  consciousness  of  industrial  conditions 
and  workers  into  a  conscious  need  of  rebellion  against 
exploitation.  As  it  teaches  the  workers  to  regard  all 
the  wealth  they  create  as  their  own,  it  reminds  them 
that  physical  force  represented  by  the  police  and  the 
army  is  the  monopoly  of  capital  and  that  labor  cannot 
win  out  in  a  contest  of  force  against  that  array;  that 
labor's  power  to  win  lies  in  its  ability  to  stand  together 
and  withhold  service. 

The  other  event  which  brought  the  question  of 
violence  before  the  country  involved  the  American 
Federation.  The  McNamara  brothers,  officers  of  the 
Bridge  and  Structural  Iron  Workers'  Union,  affiliated 
with  the  American  Federation  of  Labor,  pleaded  guilty 
to  the  charge  of  dynamiting  the  Times  Building  in 
Los  Angeles  and  the  Llewellyn  Iron  Works,  which 
resulted  in  the  former  case  in  the  death  of  twenty-one 
men. 

So  implicitly,  with  rare  exceptions,  had  union  men 
believed  in  the  innocence  of  the  brothers,  so  enthusias- 
tically had  they  contributed  thousands  of  dollars  to 
their  defence  and  conducted  at  great  personal  sacrifice 
a  long  campaign  in  behalf  of  their  trial,  that  the  con- 
fession fell  with  the  stunning  force  of  a  well-directed 


VIOLENCE  191 

blow.  The  enemies  of  the  unions,  mounting  to  victory 
sent  their  challenge  to  the  unions  through  the  press. 
In  substance  they  said :  The  confession  of  these  men 
whom  you  call  brothers  discredits  your  movement 
and  involves  your  officials  in  a  general  suspicion  that 
they  stand  for  violence,  a  charge  they  have  been  in 
the  habit  of  repudiating;  continue  at  your  peril  your 
refusal  to  join  with  law  abiding  citizens  (including  the 
representatives  of  the  National  Erectors'  Association, 
the  National  Manufacturers'  Association)  to  drag-net 
the  unions  and  clean  out  the  criminals ! 

The  challenge  was  ruthlessly  pressed  on  individual 
labor  men  by  enterprising  reporters  before  they  had 
recovered  from  the  shock  of  the  disclosure  that  the 
men  were  guilty.  Individual  union  men  answered 
variously,  depending  on  their  temper  and  strength  of 
their  convictions.  But  two  official  statements  issued  by 
the  American  Federation  were  representative  of 
the  attitude  of  the  membership.  The  one  from  the 
headquarters  in  Washington  was  in  part  as  follows : 

Organized  labor  of  America  has  no  desire  to  condone 
the  crimes  of  the  McNamaras  .  .  .  and  yet  it  is  an  awful 
commentary  upon  existing  conditions  when  any  one  man, 
among  all  the  millions  of  workers,  can  bring  himself  to 
the  frame  of  mind  that  the  only  means  to  secure  justice 
for  labor  is  in  violence,  outrage,  and  murder.  It  is  cruelly  \ 
unjust  to  hold  the  men  of  the  labor  movement  either  " 
legally  or  morally  responsible  for  the  crime  of  an  in- 
dividual member.  No  such  moral  code  or  legal  responsi- 
bility is  placed  upon  any  other  association  of  men  in  our 
country  .  .  .* 


192  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Another  statement  repudiating  the  effort  to  saddle 
the  acts  of  individuals  on  the  whole  body  of  organized 
labor  was  issued  from  a  conference  of  officers  of  inter- 
national unions  whose  headquarters  were  situated 
in  Indianapolis,  the  home  also  of  the  Bridge  and 
Structural  Iron  Workers.  "  The  conference  .  .  . 
takes  this  opportunity  to  express  its  condemnation  of 
crime  and  violence  whether  developing  in  trade  unions, 
in  commercial  enterprises  or  in  the  conduct  of  daily 
newspapers.  There  can  be  no  distinction  as  to  quality 
of  participants  in  crime,  no  palliation  for  crime,  no 
excuse  for  crime;  and  the  present  enlargement  on  a 
particular  crime,  committed  by  a  member  of  a  trade 
union,  one  among  millions  of  organized  wage  earn- 
ers, or  by  an  officer  of  a  trade  union,  one  among 
thousands  of  such  officers,  smacks  much  of  an  attempt 
to  cover  up  crime  in  other  quarters  and  to  enlarge 
the  opportunity  for  criminals  in  high  places.  .  .  . 
Every  hostile  newspaper,  and  that  means  every 
newspaper  controlled  by  the  interests,  and  there 
are  many  of  them,  every  officer  of  the  hostile 
associations,  every  opponent  of  trade  unions  has  gone 
into  ecstasy  of  enthusiasm  in  denunciation  of  trade 
unions.  Not  because  of  the  crime  to  which  the  Mc- 
Namaras  pleaded  guilty  but  because  opportunity  has 
been  afforded  to  strike  another  blow  at  the  organized 
wage  earners ;  another  avenue  has  been  presented 
through  which  to  arouse  suspicion  and  dissension  in 
their  ranks.  .  .  .  From  the  standpoint  of  law  and  hu- 


VIOLENCE  193 

manity  the  McNamaras  are  guilty  of  a  terrible  and 
revolting  crime  .  .  .  and  from  a  moral  standpoint 
the  proprietor  of  the  Los  Angeles  Times  is  just  as 
guilty  as  the  McNamaras,  and  in  his  guilt  he  is  joined 
by  those  representatives  of  the  anti-union  associations 
who  inflame  the  minds  of  the  wage  earners,  who  force 
on  them  the  one  idea  of  the  hopelessness  of  their  strug- 
gle and  who  indulge  in  legalized  crimes  in  order  that 
profit  may  thrive  and  greed  may  be  nurtured.  .  .  ." 
The  Los  Angeles  Times  is  described  as  an  "  engine  of 
destruction  more  powerful  when  damnably  used  than 
dynamite  bombs  or  nitro-glycerine."  2 

The  unions  were  pursued  with  ill-concealed  glee  by 
attorneys,  detectives,  and  the  hostile  press.  The  effect 
of  the  pursuit  was  to  throw  the  unions  back  on  con- 
trasts between  the  movement  under  their  direction 
and  the  management  of  industry.  Under  the  latter 
all-pervading  influence,  the  killing  of  the  21  men  in 
The  Times  explosion  is  called  murder,  although  it  was 
clear  that  the  intention  of  the  perpetrator  was  to  de- 
stroy the  building  and  not  the  men.  It  was  not  called 
murder  when  147  girls  were  burned  to  death  because 
the  proprietors  of  the  factory  in  which  they  were 
burned  had  their  intention  fixed  on  profits  and  disre- 
garded on  that  account  the  ordinary  precautions 
against  the  destruction  of  life.  The  killing  of  21  men 
is  called  the  "  crime  of  the  century  "  and  the  killing 
each  year  of  20,000  workers  in  industry  is  called  a 
"  deplorable  loss  of  life." 


194  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

The  National  Erectors'  Association  had  waged  a 
relentless  war  against  the  Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers'  Union,  which  existed  for  the  purpose  of 
making  life  more  bearable  in  an  industry  where  the 
life  of  the  workers  on  an  average  does  not  extend 
over  thirty-five  years ;  where  men  are  killed  at  the 
rate  of  twenty  a  week;  and  where  six  times  as  many 
are  injured.  For  the  labor  which  the  men  gave  and 
the  risks  which  they  took  they  were  paid  $2.40  for  ten 
hours'  work  before  the  union  gained  its  control  and 
reduced  the  hours  to  eight  and  increased  the  wage 
in  districts  to  $4.50.  Shorter  hours  and  better  wages 
are  themselves  protection  against  the  dangers  which 
beset  the  erection  of  steel  buildings  and  bridges.  Men 
who  are  not  over-exhausted  from  long  hours  and  enjoy 
good  living  conditions  are  better  prepared  than  others 
to  meet  the  dangers.  There  are  no  records  kept  of  men 
killed  on  non-union  as  compared  with  union  jobs, 
but  one  investigation  was  made  by  John  Mitchell  which 
the  unions  cite  as  a  fair  illustration  of  union  protec- 
tion. Out  of  the  three  bridges  built  across  the  East 
River  from  Manhattan  to  Brooklyn  and  Queens  two 
were  built  under  union  regulations  and  one  without 
union  interference.  In  the  building  of  the  two  union 
bridges  six  men  only  lost  their  lives  while  fifty-five 
men  were  killed  in  the  building  of  the  non-union 
bridge. 

But  the  sort  of  protection  which  the  iron  workers 
demanded  threatened  dividends.    To  protect  themselves 


VIOLENCE  195 

against  coercion  the  steel  constructing  companies 
organized  the  National  Erectors'  Association,  pledged 
to  destroy  that  "  un-American  "  institution,  the  union 
shop.  This  association  in  course  of  time  drove  the 
union  officers  to  despair  in  their  effort  to  establish  or 
to  hold  the  union  shop  and  its  regulations.  The  deeds 
to  which  the  McNamaras  confessed  were  born  of  their 
desperation.  Having  driven  the  union  to  desperation 
the  association  of  erectors  used  the  confession  to 
create  a  public  impression  that  the  violence  of  these 
men  and  the  union  was  typical  of  the  policy  of  the 
union  movement  generally.  It  was  with  consummate 
effrontery  that  they  turned  to  the  public  and  to  union 
men  requesting  their  help  in  clearing  the  country  of 
the  violence  perpetrated  by  union  officers.  They  did 
not  lessen  the  insult  by  explaining  that  they  proposed 
this  campaign  against  the  union  for  their  own  good. 
If  to  accomplish  their  end  it  became  necessary  to  wreck 
the  whole  union  movement  (and  detectives  and  sec- 
tions of  the  press  intimated  that  it  would  be)  they 
were  prepared  to  help  all  good  unionists  to  make  that 
sacrifice. 

When  the  McNamaras  were  arrested  evidence  of 
complicity  of  other  union  officials  was  in  the  hands 
of  the  Erectors'  Association.  During  the  trial  of  these 
other  officials,  thirty-eight  altogether,  it  developed  that 
detectives  for  the  Association  had  been  employed  for 
six  years  in  gathering  evidence  before  making  an 
arrest.    They  left  no  doubt  in  the  mind  of  any  one  that 


196  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

they  had  expected  to  indict  officials  of  the  American 
Federation  and  involve  other  unions  besides  the  Struc- 
tural Iron  Workers.  They  expected  to  dissolve  not  one 
union  of  a  few  thousand  workers  but  to  disorganize 
a  movement  including  two  million  workers. 

As  the  union  men  came  to  believe  that  the  hunt  was 
less  for  the  suppression  of  violence  than  for  the  sup- 
pression of  the  union  movement  the  note  of  hesitancy 
and  apology  expressed  by  many  union  men  turned  to 
resentment.  They  had  been  convinced  before  the  con- 
fession of  the  McNamaras  that  their  arrest  was  "  a 
frame-up  ";  they  now  understood  for  the  first  time  the 
ground  for  their  suspicion. 

In  the  Amalgamated  Journal  of  Iron,  Steel  and 
Tin  Workers  Judson  O'Neil  remarked,  "  The  labor 
movement  has  nothing  to  apologize  for  in  this 
case.  Under  like  circumstances  we  shall  in  all  proba- 
bility do  the  same  thing  .  .  .  when  the  workers  real- 
ize that  violence  is  also  a  monopoly  of  big  business 
.  .  .  there  will  be  a  different  tale  to  tell."  3 

Anton  Johannsen,  representing  the  Building  Trades 
Council  of  California,  speaking  in  behalf  of  the 
officials  on  trial  said : 

They  found  that  in  that  industry  (steel)  every  single 
labor  union  had  been  completely  destroyed  and  annihil- 
ated with  but  one  exception,  the  Bridge  and  Structural 
Iron  Workers'  Union.  You  can  draw  your  own  inference, 
but  every  union  was  destroyed  by  the  steel  trust  and  all 
those  men  who  had  lost  their  organization  worked  twelve 


VIOLENCE  197 

hours  a  day  for  $409  a  year  as  the  average  wage.  We 
have  a  Congressional  report  to  back  us  up  as  to  the  facts. 
What  are  the  facts  in  connection  with  the  Iron  Workers' 
International  Union?  In  seven  years  during  the  ad- 
ministration of  John  J.  McNamara  the  union  increased 
its  membership  from  5,000  to  nearly  14,000  members. 
They  established  an  eight-hour  day  from  the  Atlantic  to 
the  Pacific,  from  Texas  to  the  Canadian  line,  and  they 
established  a  wage  scale  of  $4.30  as  compared  with  $2.20 
....  I  do  not  know,  but  I  suppose  that  the  McNamaras 
became  convinced  that  no  amount  of  pleading,  no  amount 
of  argument,  no  amount  of  logic,  no  amount  of  Christian- 
ity, no  amount  of  politics,  would  convince  the  steel  trust 
that  they  could  give  eight  hours  and  give  them  living 
wages.  Labor  would  have  to  organize.  The  steel  trust 
had  what  they  called  the  National  Erectors'  Association, 
one  of  the  tributaries  of  the  steel  trust,  and  the  National 
Erectors  'Association  had  what  they  called  the  American 
Bridge  Company,  another  tributary  of  the  steel  trust. 
.  .  .  How  long  do  they  expect  those  260,000  men  and 
boys  to  work  in  the  steel  industry  for  $409  a  year, 
twelve  hours  a  day,  without  becoming  imbued  with 
animosity  and  despair?  How  do  they  expect  it?  If  a 
man  says  to  me  McNamara  should  be  condemned  my 
reply  is :  All  right,  we  will  condemn  the  McNamaras ;  we 
will  also  condemn  the  Carnegies.  If  a  man  says  to  me 
that  the  Iron  Workers'  Union  should  be  condemned  I 
say,  All  right;  we  will  also  condemn  the  steel  trust.  If 
they  say.  We  want  light,  we  want  justice;  all  right,  light 
up  the  iron  workers,  light  up  the  steel  trust,  light  up 
labor  and  light  up  capital.  Put  on  the  searchlight  for  both 
parties  and  we  are  willing  that  our  sins  shall  be  com- 
pared with  their  sins.  4 

Any  one  who  interprets  these  answers  of  labor  as 
arguments  in   favor  of  violence  fails  to  understand 


198  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  force  of  the  reason  or  impulse  which  binds  men 
together  in  unions.  The  conviction  of  union  men  is 
that  violence  does  not  meet  the  occasion,  not  that  the 
occasion  does  not  justify  it.  The  occasion  develops 
violence  and  unions  stand  by  members  who  have  been 
goaded  by  conditions  to  commit  violence  in  protection 
of  their  purpose  which  is  opposition  to  violence  in 
industry.  Violence  is  inconsistent  with  organization; 
it  is  its  antithesis,  and  no  people  know  this  so  well  as 
those  whose  lives  are  spent  in  attaining  organization. 

The  McNamara  incident  failed  to  convict  the  labor 
movement  of  violence.  It  served  rather  to  bring  out 
in  relief  the  effort  of  the  unions  to  protect  life  against 
the  wanton  disregard  for  life  which  characterizes  the 
promoters  of  American  industry. 

In  the  chapter  on  "  Strikes  and  Violence "  it  is 
shown  that  the  violence  of  unarmed  strikers  pales  into 
sickly  effort  before  the  authorized  brutality  of  a  well- 
armed  police  force  or  militia.  While  society  condones 
violence  in  industry  and  meets  opposition  to  that  vio- 
lence with  armed  interference  it  will  inevitably  reap 
an  occasional  harvest  of  labor  violence.  As  it  under- 
takes to  quell  the  opposition  with  its  official  force  it 
places  the  labor  unions  in  the  lead  in  the  fight  against 
violence.  The  violence  of  the  police  in  the  Shirt 
Waist  Strike  in  New  York  City  advertised  the  thought 
of  organization  of  women  workers  throughout  the 
country  and  even  in  Europe,  as  the  peaceful  efforts 
of  union  officials  had  failed  to  do.     And  in  the  same 


VIOLENCE  199 

way  the  violence  of  the  militia  in  the  Lawrence  strike 
carried  the  suggestion  of  rebellion  to  many  thousand 
unskilled  and  apathetic  workers.  The  violence  of 
state  officers  quickens  public  interest  and  stimulates 
imagination.  The  community  lines  up  and  rebellious 
labor  makes  new  friends  and  new  recruits.  While 
individuals  surrender  reason  to  the  consuming  forces 
of  passion  their  militant  acts  in  defence  of  a  human 
cause  kindle  thought  among  the  masses  of  men. 


CHAPTER  XV 
STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE 

Value  of  legal  rights  to  picket — Union  position  in  regard  to  vio- 
lence in  strikes — Authorized  methods — Conflicting  elements 
on  picket  field — Paterson  strike — Mass  picketing — Lawrence 
strike — Outside  testimony  in  regard  to  violence — Failure  of 
law  to  protect  picketing  in  New  York — Order  to  regard 
pickets  as  vagrants — Story  of  Calumet  strike — Strike  of 
Colorado  Miners — Citizens'  alliances. 

The  state  laws  generally  recognize  that  strikers 
have  a  right  to  approach  fellow  workers  and  to  peace- 
fully persuade  them  to  refrain  from  working.  But 
the  right  vouchsafed  a  picket  to  walk  up  and  down 
in  front  of  a  work-shop  where  the  strike  occurred,  to 
speak  to  men  and  women  on  their  way  to  work  in  the 
shop  and  to  dissuade  them  if  possible  from  entering, 
is  not  a  particular  right  of  a  picket  but  of  any  man  or 
woman.  The  withholding  of  such  a  right  would  be  a 
clear  case  of  discrimination  against  strikers. 

The  value  of  the  right  as  a  practical  concession  is 
constantly  in  review.  The  question  centers  around 
whether  the  speaking  of  a  picket  to  others  or  his  pres- 
ence in  the  vicinity  causes  disturbance.  Also  questions 
of  disturbance  are  questions  of  degree.  And  as  an 
actual  fact  the  simplest  form  of  picketing  is  a  dis- 
turbance.    A  striker,  by  speaking  to  a  man  whose  in- 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  201 

tention  is  fixed  on  working,  about  the  desire  of  others 
that  he  should  discontinue  his  intention,  disturbs  the 
man  and  his  would-be-employer.  The  purposes  of  the 
picket  and  of  the  other  two  are  opposed.  If  the  picket 
is  effective,  if  he  actually  pickets,  he  must  persist  in 
spite  of  the  annoyance.  A  vigilant  police  officer  or  a 
soldier,  stationed  in  the  strike  field  to  maintain  order 
and  interpreting  the  order  literally  and  in  the  interest 
of  the  struck  plant,  will  arrest  any  active  picket  on  the 
ground  of  annoyance.  On  the  same  ground  he  will 
be  sentenced  by  a  magistrate  or  held  by  military  com- 
mand for  disorderly  conduct.  Such  are  the  common 
interpretations  of  peaceful  picketing.  Innumerable 
records  of  such  rulings  may  be  found  in  magistrates' 
courts. 

Labor  unions  do  not  claim  that  strikers  are  never 
disturbers  of  the  peace.  But  unions  of  all  affiliations 
insist  that:  (1)  rioting  and  violence  .are  .goad  iojrjhe. 
cause  of  the  employer  and  bad  for  the  cause  of  the 
sjxikej-s^jdirjextly^  certain  aggra^ 

vated  cases;  (2)  that  theimpoxtaj^on_oij^u^ 
fessional  strike-breakers  into__s_^il^^_pjies^r^cirjitates 
riots;  (3)  that  the  presencx_ofjmHtiajs_n^^on^dj^ve 
to__order  but  to_ violence;    (4)    that   "striker"   and 
"  rioter  "  are  synonymous  tejuiis^_the_ayeragejudge. 

The  usual  instructions  given  by  union  officers  to 
strikers  is  to  picket  with  hands  in  pockets,  to  walk 
singly  or  in  twos,  to  watch  closely  for  every  possible 
strike-breaker,  and  to  persuade,  to  persist  in  persuad- 


202  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ing  them  by  all  peaceful  means,  that  is,  by  means  of 
speech  only,  to  forego  their  intention  of  taking 
strikers'  jobs. 

If  the  strike  occurs  in  the  city,  the  pickets  on  reach- 
ing their  field  of  activity  find  applicants  for  the  struck 
jobs  who  had  not  known  that  a  strike  was  on;  they 
find  others  who  are  not  unionists  but  as  scornful  of 
scabbing  as  they  are ;  they  find  others  who  are  curious 
to  hear  the  pickets'  story;  then  they  find  the  other 
sort  who  resent  the  attitude  of  all  strikers  and  are 
interested  only  in  their  personal  relation  with  the  em- 
ployer and  the  opportunity  which  he  holds  out  for 
work.  In  all  strikes  the  applicants  for  the  struck  job 
vary  from  those  who  are  sympathetic  with  strikers  and 
susceptible  to  persuasion  to  those  who  are  antagonistic. 

It  is  the  object  of  the  pickets  to  reach  all  of  these 
men  before  they  are  reached  by  the  employer.  It  is 
the  object  of  the  employer  to  reach  all  of  the  men  be- 
fore they  are  reached  by  the  pickets.  If  the  field  is 
clear  between  the  applicants  for  work  and  the  pickets 
no  question  of  peaceful  picketing  arises.  There  is  no 
one  there  to  draw  the  fine  distinctions  as  to  what  con- 
stitutes disturbance  in  picketing;  and  a  strike-breaker, 
if  alone  with  a  picket,  while  he  may  have  no  ground 
for  fear  of  physical  harm,  will  not  have  the  moral 
courage  to  face  alone  the  odium  of  scabbing. 

But  picketing  under  such  circumstances  seldom  hap- 
pens or  when  it  does  is  of  short  duration.  The  moment 
a  strike  occurs  and  before  picketing  actually  begins 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  203 

employers  usually  inform  the  police  that  a  strike  is 
on,  that  trouble  is  expected  and  that  their  protection 
is  needed.  The  police  department  answers  the  call 
on  the  assumption  that  strikers  are  rioters.  Or  if  a 
strike  is  in  a  rural  district,  the  smallest  disturbance 
is  used  as  an  excuse  for  calling  in  the  militia,  who  like 
the  police  answer  the  call  with  a  well-settled  under- 
standing that  it  is  the  strikers  who  need  to  be  sup- 
pressed. To  keep  up  an  official  guard  it  is  important 
that  the  public  be  reassured  that  violence  is  active  or 
imminent.  It  is  important  that  applicants  for  work 
be  reassured  that  the  pickets  are  their  enemies  lying 
in  wait  to  attack  and  that  the  employers  are  their  pro- 
tectors and  friends.  The  employers'  private  detectives 
and  guards,  who  are  usually  professional  strike-break- 
ers, intensify  the  situation  as  they  aggravate  the  pickets 
and  induce  riots  and  disorder. 

These  private  guards,  together  with  the  police  or 
the  militia,  are  on  hand  ostensibly  to  keep  order.  But 
they  line  up  together  on  the  assumption  that  the  pick- 
ets are  disturbers  of  law  and  order  and  the  employer 
is  the  law-abiding  factor  in  the  situation.  The  picket 
field  thus  divided  seethes  with  suggestion  of  violence, 
with  official  and  unofficial  provocation. 

A  strike  occurred  in  the  silk  mills  of  Paterson,  New 
Jersey,  where  picketing  is  legal.  The  New  York 
Globe  in  an  editorial  pointed  out  that  local  newspapers, 
although  bitterly  opposed  to  the  strike,  were  brought 
to  comment :     "  The  strike  has  had  one  remarkable 


204  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

feature  which  the  people  of  Paterson  will  never  forget. 
It  is  that  although  many  thousand  strikers  stayed  away 
from  the  mill  for  five  months,  not  only  was  there  prac- 
tically no  violence  but  the  rank  and  file  of  the  strikers 
behaved  themselves  during  a  trying  time  in  a  manner 
that  entitled  them  to  admiration."  The  Press  believes 
that  "this  phase  of  the  great  strike  of  1913  stands 
without  a  parallel  in  this  or  any  other  country." 
Together  with  this  testimony  of  a  paper  unfriendly  to 
the  strikers  it  is  enlightening  to  remember  that  1,200 
pickets  were  arrested  and  300  fined  or  sentenced.  The 
Globe  in  the  same  editorial  explained  why  well- 
behaved  strikers  were  arrested  by  the  wholesale. 

Paterson  is  afflicted  with  anarchistic  administration 
officers  and  with  a  judge  and  a  public  prosecutor  who 
recall  Jeffreys  and  his  hanging  assistant.  These  stupid 
and  wicked  persons  when  the  strike  began  thought  to 
suppress  it  by  breaking  up  peaceable  meetings  and  pre- 
venting free  speech  and  making  arbitrary  arrests.  The 
result  has  been  the  struggle  has  lasted  five  months  and 
the  estimated  cost  to  the  city  is  $5,000,000.  As  often 
as  it  was  about  to  collapse  the  public  authorities  started 
it  up  again.  ...  Is  it  strange  that  the  workers  of  Pater- 
son are  bitter  at  heart?  Lawlessness  does  not  pay.  It 
does  not  pay  labor  organizations  as  they  have  discovered 
and  hence  the  advice  of  Haywood  to  his  pickets,  "  Keep 
your  hands  in  your  pockets."  .  .  ,1 

The  popular  belief  is  that  the  Industrial  Workers  in- 
cite pickets  to  commit  violence.  The  opposite  is  true. 
The  mass  picketing  introduced  and  advocated  by  them 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  205 

requires  that  the  strikers  keep  up  a  continuous  line  of 
march  around  the  struck  plant  and  make  their  good 
spirits,  their  songs  and  faith  in  each  other  an  irresist- 
ible appeal  to  all  workers.  Mass  picketing  as  it  was 
conducted  in  the  memorable  strikes  of  the  Industrial 
Workers  of  1912  and  1913  were  demonstrations 
which  served  as  contrasts;  contrasts  between  the 
strength  of  workers  joined  together  in  their  common 
purpose  and  the  helplessness  of  capital  without  labor 
or  the  helplessness  of  an  employer  in  efforts  to  coerce 
workers  into  terms  of  work  dictated  by  him. 

The  first  popular  appreciation  of  mass  picketing 
under  the  direction  of  the  Industrial  Workers  occurred 
in  the  strike  of  the  mill  workers  in  Lawrence,  Massa- 
chusetts. The  strike  tied  up  the  mills  completely. 
The  cheerful,  gay  line  of  pickets  around  the  mills  gave 
certain  promise  of  a  continued  shut  down,  a  more  cer- 
tain promise  than  violence  or  bad  spirit  could  have 
done.  It  was  clear  if  the  strike  was  to  be  broken 
that  spirits  must  be  dampened.  A  fire  hose  was  used 
for  the  purpose.  A  great  stream  of  cold  water  on 
a  day  in  January  was  poured  on  a  mass  of  pickets, 
drenching  their  clothes  and  chilling  their  bodies.  The 
purpose  was  attained.  The  pickets  angrily  resented 
the  attack  and  stoned  the  factory.  Here  was  the 
excuse  needed  for  calling  in  the  militia  and  swearing 
in  special  detectives,  for  the  protection  of  the  property 
of  the  mill  owners  which  they  could  prove  had  been 
attacked.      On   their   arrival   the   insults   offered   the 


206  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

pickets  increased.  Every  known  method  used  to 
annoy  pickets  was  adopted.  The  aggressors  were  not 
arrested  but  the  strikers  and  their  friends  were  ar- 
rested, beaten,  and  shot. 

Picketing  is  legal  in  New  York,  but  the  law  has 
failed  to  protect  countless  numbers  of  law-abiding 
pickets.  The  women's  strikes  in  the  clothing  trades 
offer  abundant  evidence.  If  a  woman  picket  is  seen 
by  a  representative  of  a  struck  factory  or  by  a  repre- 
sentative of  the  police  court  to  speak  to  another 
woman  on  her  way  to  or  from  the  factory  and  if  she 
is  successful  in  dissuading  the  woman  from  working, 
the  picket  is  spotted.  If  she  continues  her  effective 
work  she  finds  herself  the  center  of  a  disturbance 
worked  up  by  the  thugs  hanging  around  the  factory 
doors  or  she  is  crowded  on  the  sidewalk  and  told  to 
her  surprise  that  she  is  blocking  the  traffic  or  she  is 
insulted  by  the  police.  When  she  resists  these  ag- 
gressions she  is  arrested.  In  court,  the  word  of  the 
police  officer  is  invariably  taken  against  her  word  and 
she  is  fined  or  given  a  workhouse  sentence. 

During  the  clothing  strike  of  1913,  the  Mayor  of 
New  York  City  issued  an  order  on  the  request  of 
clothing  manufacturers  and  certain  disgruntled  union 
officials,  to  regard  pickets  on  duty  around  the  fac- 
tories as  vagrants.  This  order  was  issued  in  the  first 
instance  to  apply  to  the  clothing  strikers  only,  but  it 
happened  that  there  was  another  strike  in  progress 
of  straw-hat  makers  in  the  same  neighborhood.     At 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  207 

the  instigation  of  the  manufacturers  the  Mayor  ex- 
tended the  order  to  apply  to  all  pickets  of  all  trades  in 
the  vicinity.  The  Mayor  took  the  position  that  the  in- 
terests of  the  manufacturers  and  the  public  were  of 
primary  importance.  The  legal  rights  of  the  workers 
were  relegated  to  protest  meetings  while  the  decision 
broke  the  strikes. 

While  labor  unions  of  whatever  affiliation  declare 
that  violence  on  the  part  of  pickets  is  bad  strike  tactics 
there  is  not  an  officer  who  does  not  realize  that  men 
will  not  long  submit  to  insults  and  other  provocations 
planned  by  the  opposition  without  retaliation.  All 
strikers,  in  time,  refuse  to  submit  to  the  degrading 
insults  of  government  officials  or  agents  of  employers. 
The  miners  in  the  strike  in  West  Virginia  met  the 
violence  of  the  operators'  agents  and  the  agents  of  the 
state  with  armed  resistance.  The  war  advertised  the 
strike,  the  causes  which  led  up  to  the  strike,  and  the 
official  disregard  of  constitutional  rights.  The  story 
was  laid  before  Congress  and  a  congressional  inves- 
tigation placed  the  responsibility  on  the  mine  owners 
and  the  state  officials.  The  West  Virginia  miners 
believe  to-day  that  violence  in  return  for  violence  paid. 

There  was  no  effort  to  conceal  the  partiality  of  state 
officers  of  Michigan  for  mine  owners  during  the  strike 
of  the  Calumet  miners.  Before  the  strike  reached  the 
tense  period  which  followed  a  Christmas  eve  celebra- 
tion and  before  the  deportation  and  shooting  of  the 
president  of  the  miners'  union  the  story  of  the  strike 


2o8  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

was  told  as  follows  by  John  Walker  of  the  United 
Mine  Workers'  Union : 

Some  time  before  coming  out  on  strike,  these  men  had 
organized  and  became  members  of  the  Western  Federa- 
tion of  Miners.  They  had  been  working  a  so-called  ten- 
hour  day.  They  were  more  than  an  average  of  eleven 
hours  per  day  underground.  Their  wages  would  not 
average  $2.20  per  day.  I  have  seen  their  statements  and 
made  a  personal  investigation  of  the  matter.  As  low  as 
27  cents  per  shift  has  been  paid  for  nine  shifts  work ; 
another  got  $1.61  per  shift  for  nineteen  shifts  work. 
Some  received  as  high  as  $3.00  per  day. 

And  to  cap  it  all,  the  companies  decided  to  make  the 
miners  handle  the  drilling  machine  single  (they  weigh 
over  200  pounds)  which  had  formerly  been  handled 
double.  When  a  person  knows  what  it  means  drilling 
hard  rock,  with  a  machine  of  that  type,  operated  by 
compressed  air.  sometimes  on  a  staging  up  in  a  slope 
amid  dangerous  roof  and  hanging  rock,  with  not  one 
breath  of  air  except  the  exhausts  from  the  machine,  the 
light  just  a  small  flicker  in  the  dark,  you  can  understand 
why  they  revolt. 

The  men  held  meetings,  decided  to  request  recognition 
of  their  union,  an  eight-hour  working  day,  a  minimum 
wage  of  $3.00  for  underground  men,  and  a  proportionate 
increase  for  those  working  above  ground  and  that  two 
men  be  allowed  to  work  on  the  machines  as  formerly. 

They  requested  a  joint  conference  with  representatives 
of  the  company  to  try  to  come  to  an  agreement  on  these 
questions.  Their  requests  were  met  with  scorn  and  con- 
tempt, and  a  decision  to  strike  followed.  At  first  the 
company  refused  to  take  the  situation  seriously,  stating 
that  the  strike  would  collapse  before  the  end  of  a  week ; 
that  they  had  ruled  those  men  for  fifty  years  and  had 
never  recognized  a  union  or  treated  with  their  men  in  that 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  209 

way;  that  they  had  always  done  what  pleased  them  and 
that  they  proposed  to  continue  to  do  so. 

Since  the  companies  have  realized  that  the  men  are  in 
earnest  they  have  tried  every  means  known  to  the  most 
vicious,  heartless,  and  conscienceless  slave-driving  cor- 
poration to  break  the  strike,  but  so  far  have  failed  utterly. 
The  Governor  sent  in  the  militia.  The  Sheriff  gave  his 
office  to  the  Waddell-Mahon  strong-arm  gunmen,  im- 
ported from  the  slum  districts  of  New  York  and  other 
large  cities. 

The  press  has  maliciously  slandered  and  deliberately 
lied  about  the  miners'  cause,  the  miners,  and  their  rep- 
resentatives. The  militiamen  have  driven  their  horses 
on  top  of  peaceful  citizens  on  the  sidewalks,  beaten 
up  and  intimidated  the  miners  in  every  way  known  to 
a  professional  strike-breaker  in  an  effort  to  discourage 
or  scare  them  into  going  back  to  work  as  slaves  to  the 
copper  mine  owners.  In  fact,  Gen.  Abbey,  in  com- 
mand of  the  troops,  only  differs  from  Chief  Strike- 
Breaker  Farley  in  that  his  work  is  done  in  a  govern- 
ment uniform,  in  the  name  of  the  state,  and  he  is 
paid  direct  out  of  the  people's  money  for  his  service. 
He  is  even  more  able,  in  my  judgment,  in  using  the 
militia  as  scab  herders,  strike-breakers,  and  black-leg 
protectors  .  .  . 

They  have  shot  people  in  the  back,  browbeaten  men 
and  boys,  insulted  women  and  girls,  and,  after  filling  up  on 
beer  and  whiskey  sent  them  by  the  mine  owners,  swag- 
gered up  and  down  the  streets  with  their  big  guns 
and  sabres,  a  disgrace  to  the  rottenest  government  on 
earth,  let  alone  ours ;  a  standing  menace  to  peace  and 
decency.  The  imported  Waddell-Mahon  man-killers 
have  murdered  two  men  in  cold  blood,  the  most  cowardly 
and  wantonly  brutal  and  utterly  unwarranted  butchery 
I  ever  had  any  knowledge  of.  They  seriously  wounded 
two  others,  powder-burnt  the  face  of  a  baby  and  shot 
a  bullet  through  its  clothes,  while  it  was  being  held  in 


210  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  arms  of  its  terror-stricken  mother,  while  three  other 
little  tots  were  crouched  around  her  knees.  These 
people  were  in  their  own  home,  engaged  in  taking 
their  evening  meal,  when  the  outrages  were  committed. 
Hundreds  of  others  have  been  insulted  and  beaten  up 
by  these  gutter  ruffians  and  the  militia  has  always  been 
on  the  scene  to  encourage  them  in  their  devilish  work. 
Notwithstanding  all  these  things,  the  men  are  stand- 
ing as  firm  as  the  day  they  came  out,  as  solid'  as  a 
stone  wall,  determined  to  win,  no  matter  how  long  it 
takes  or  at  what  cost.  They  are  making  a  wonderful 
fight.  The  copper  barons  have  heretofore  succeeded 
in  keeping  practically  all  other  organizations  from  being 
established  here.  3 

When  miners  go  on  strike  they  know  that  the  state 
militia  will  be  used  against  them.  Their  choice  in 
West  Virginia,  Michigan,  and  Colorado  in  1913  and 
1914  was  between  unconditional  surrender  or  resisting 
with  arms.  In  West  Virginia  they  used  arms  and 
made  substantial  gains  in  union  recognition.  In 
Michigan,  unarmed,  they  surrendered.  In  Colo- 
rado they  used  arms.  At  the  time  of  writing  there 
is  a  truce.  There  was  no  chance  for  a  judicious 
consideration  as  to  whether  or  not  violence  would  pay 
in  the  strike  of  the  Colorado  miners,  called  in  Sep- 
tember, 19 13.  The  national  union,  the  United  Mine 
Workers,  had  tried  out  all  legal  and  peaceful  methods 
which  had  been  followed  in  other  coal  fields  for 
settling  terms  of  work.  But  Colorado  miners 
who  attempted  to  bring  organization  into  their  indus- 
try were  rewarded  with  discharge  or  discrimination. 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  211 

The  efforts  of  the  miners  to  secure  state  pro- 
tection against  some  of  the  most  flagrant  abuses 
were  equally  impotent.  Five  of  the  demands  out  of 
the  seven  which  they  made  before  they  struck  were 
embodied  in  state  laws.  But  those  laws  like  all  others 
which  were  contrary  to  the  interest  of  the  coal  cor- 
porations were  still-born.  It  was  the  law  of  the 
corporations  which  prevailed  in  Colorado  coal  fields, 
and  the  administrators  of  that  law  were  state  officials 
and  mine  superintendents.  Such  charges  against  the 
state  and  the  corporations  the  miners  had  been  re- 
iterating for  years  to  no  purpose. 

The  officials  of  the  United  Mine  Workers  knew  the 
bitterness  and  the  resentment  which  existed  among 
the  miners  in  Colorado.  They  knew  that  the  men  had 
lost  faith  in  petitions  and  peaceful  persuasion.  They 
knew  that  the  miners  in  the  northern  and  southern 
coal  fields  would  rather  fight  and  face  death  than  live 
longer  enduring  the  arrogance,  insults,  and  successive 
defeats  meted  out  to  them  by  the  state  and  private 
representatives  of  the  corporations  owning  the  mines. 
Knowing  the  temper  of  the  Colorado  men,  the  national 
union  hesitated  before  calling  a  strike,  but  having  ex- 
hausted all  its  resources  for  obtaining  a  peaceful 
settlement,  it  was  forced  to  yield  to  the  demand 
of  the  men  that  a  strike  be  called,  as  it  was  the  men 
and  not  the  officers  who  were  the  victims  of  conditions 
which  the  operators  imposed. 

There  was  occasional  violence  in  the  early  months 


212  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

of  the  strike;  notably  the  deportation  of  the  miners' 
Mother  Jones  and  her  detention  without  civil 
authority,  without  permitting  habeas  corpus  pro- 
ceedings. But  such  incidents  were  becoming  a  com- 
monplace in  times  of  strikes  and  it  failed  to  arouse  the 
country.  It  was  not  until  April  when  the  miners 
opened  war  against  the  anarchy  of  the  state  officials 
and  the  violence  of  private  guards  that  the  attention 
of  the  country  became  fixed  on  Colorado,  its  miners, 
its  operators,  and  its  state  officials. 

In  West  Virginia,  a  Congressional  Commission  in- 
quired into  the  abuse  of  constitutional  rights  after  the 
crisis  in  the  strike  had  been  reached.  In  Colorado,  a 
Congressional  Commission  discovered  before  warfare 
commenced  that  the  miners'  charges  of  oppression  as 
well  as  of  anarchy  were  true.  But  the  light  gained 
by  the  Commission  reached  only  those  already  inter- 
ested in  the  struggle.  The  testimony  before  that  com- 
mission received  national  attention  only  after  the 
miners  assumed  their  position  of  aggression.  Every- 
thing that  had  happened  as  well  as  what  was  happening 
in  Colorado  became  important  from  that  time.  It  at 
last  became  clear  to  the  reading  public  that  the  state 
had  deputized  mine  guards  in  the  hire  of  the  operators 
to  act  as  part  of  the  state  militia  in  defending  the 
mine  owners,  their  strike  breakers,  and  their  property, 
and  had  treated  the  miners,  their  children,  and  their 
friends  with  wanton  cruelty.  It  became  known  gen- 
erally that  these  mine  guards  had  been  recruited  from 


STRIKES  AND  VIOLENCE  213 

criminal  gangs  who  hired  out  to  do  murder  for 
the  coal  operators  in  West  Virginia  and  the  owners 
of  the  copper  fields  in  Michigan.  A  roster  of 
one  of  the  troops  used  in  Colorado  showed  that 
126  of  the  168  militiamen  were  in  the  employ  of 
the  coal  companies.  It  was  the  superior  resistance 
which  the  miners  of  Colorado  were  able  to  show 
to  the  resistance  of  the  miners  in  the  other  coal 
fields  which  aroused  the  country  and  advertised  the 
methods  which  are  used  by  the  mining  companies  in 
their  opposition  to  the  organization  of  the  workers. 
It  was  not  until  the  miners  changed  their  tactics  from 
asking  to  fighting  and  successfully  fighting  the  militia 
of  Colorado  that  the  country  understood.  Although 
the  Federal  troops  have  forced  a  truce  at  the  time  of 
writing  it  is  clear  to  every  one  that  peace  will  not 
return  to  Colorado  until  the  miners  are  free  to  or- 
ganize and  the  control  of  the  state  has  passed  from 
the  hands  of  coal  operators. 

The  formation  of  citizens'  alliances  in  times  of 
strikes  is  a  certain  promise  of  lawlessness  and  outrage. 
In  the  name  of  citizenship  these  alliances  deport 
strikers,  and  enter  homes  of  strikers  without  a  war- 
rant. They  have  beaten,  clubbed,  shot  strikers  in  the 
same  spirit  that  other  alliances  of  the  same  sort  have 
burnt  negroes. 

A  suggestion  of  the  Los  Angeles  Times,  the  paper 
dedicated  to  the  task  of  ridding  the  country  of  "  un- 
stable "  labor  unions,  was  reported  as  follows  to  a 


214  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

convention  of  the  American  Federation :  "  And  soon, 
it  has  begun  to  happen  already,  the  plain  citizens 
of  every  country  will  form  a  combine.  Its  object 
will  be  the  suppression  of  sedition  and  anarchy  in 
the  persons  of  the  professional  agitators.  Theirs 
will  be  a  big,  powerful,  effective  but  very  unostenta- 
tious revolt.  It  will  work  quickly,  surely,  silently. 
The  first  thing  the  Plain  Citizen  Combine  will 
accomplish  is  the  quiet  removal  of  these  gentle- 
men. They  won't  be  blown  up;  they  will  just 
quietly  disappear  from  human  ken.  There  will 
be  a  little  inquiry  at  first  but  it  will  die  down  ever  so 
quickly,  for  of  all  people  in  the  world  the  pro- 
fessional agitator  depends  entirely  upon  his  presence 
and  his  glib  tongue  to  maintain  any  sort  of  interest  or 
influence  in  his  followers.  His  impassioned  rhetoric 
is  his  only  asset."  4  These  "  Plain  Citizen  Combines  " 
do  not  always  work  so  silently  as  the  Times  con~ 
templated.  In  Calumet  they  did  not  have  to ;  the  con- 
trolling sentiment  of  Calumet  stood  back  of  the  pat- 
riotic citizens  who  assaulted,  shot,  and  deported  the 
president  of  the  miners'  union  on  strike  when  he  re- 
fused to  do  their  bidding. 


CHAPTER  XVI 
SABOTAGE 

Definitions — Not  new  idea — Not  confined  to  strikes  or  labor 
union  action — In  stage  of  advocacy — Defense  of  revolution- 
ists— Destruction    stupid. 

In  the  introduction  to  a  little  book  by  Emile  Pouget 
on  "  Sabotage  "  Arturo  Giovannitti,  a  leading  spokes- 
man of  the  Industrial  Workers,  defines  sabotage  as : 
( i )  "  Any  conscious  and  willful  act  on  the  part  of  one 
or  more  workers  intended  to  slacken  and  reduce  the 
output  of  production  in  the  industrial  field,  or  to 
restrict  trade  and  reduce  the  profits  in  the  commercial 
field,  in  order  to  secure  from  their  employers  better 
conditions  or  to  enforce  those  promised  or  maintain 
those  already  prevailing,  when  no  other  way  of  redress 
is  open;  (2)  Any  skillful  operation  on  the  machinery 
of  production  intended  not  to  destroy  it  or  permanently 
render  it  defective  but  only  to  temporarily  disable  it 
and  to  put  it  out  of  running  condition  in  order  to 
make  impossible  the  work  of  scabs  and  thus  to  secure 
the  complete  and  real  stoppage  of  work  during  a 
strike."  1 

The  qualifying  statements  in  regard  to  destruction 
are  not  essential  parts  of  the  definition  of  the  word, 
but   they   are   essential   to   an   understanding  of  the 

215 


216  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

policy  of  the  organization  which  advocates  the  use 
of  sabotage  as  a  method.  Those  qualifying  state- 
ments are  insisted  upon  in  every  case  and  by  all  the 
leaders.  Doctor  James  Warbasse,  who  is  empowered 
to  speak  for  the  Industrial  Workers,  in  his  definition 
recognizes  that  the  qualifications  have  to  do  with  the 
practice  rather  than  the  definition.  In  a  pamphlet 
reprinted  from  the  New  York  Call  his  definition  in- 
cludes a  statement  of  the  theoretical  basis  for  its  use : 

Sabotage  in  its  broad  sense  as  understood  and  applied 
in  the  modern  industrial  movement  is  the  cooperative 
application  by  workers  of  measures  for  the  retardation 
of  the  profit-making  business  of  employers,  having  as 
its  objects  the  securing  of  concessions  from  the  latter 
in  the  interests  of  the  former  as  a  class ;  the  demonstra- 
tion of  the  power  and  the  indispensability  of  the  workers 
and  the  bringing  about  ultimately  of  a  better  society. 
There  exists  in  the  public  mind  an  erroneous  notion 
that  sabotage  means  the  destruction  of  property  by 
violence  practised  by  striking  workers  with  no  further 
object  than  that  of  coercing  employers  into  granting 
workers  certain  immediate  demands.  While  the  violent 
destruction  of  property  is  sometimes  a  feature  of  sab- 
otage, it  is  exceptional  but  by  no  means  characteristic. 
The  term  is  applied  also  to  any  form  of  curtailment 
of  output  or  destruction  of  property  in  the  interest  of 
business,  provided  it  is  practised  by  one  class  at  the  ex- 
pense of  a  second  class.  The  workers  thus  speak  of  the 
depredations  of  capital  as  sabotage.  Literally  the  term 
means  to  move  slowly  with  heavy  feet.  Destruction 
of  property  or  reduction  of  output  practised  by  an 
individual  for  his  personal  ends  is  not  to  be  dignified 
by  being  called  sabotage.     It  is  possible  that  industrial 


SABOTAGE  217 

terminology  will  not  long  sanction  the  use  of  the  word 
when  applied  to  the  petty  interests  of  craft  unions. 
Sabotage  is  a  war  measure.  In  so  far  as  war  is  unethical 
sabotage  is  unethical.  It  presupposes  the  existence  of  a 
conflict  between  the  capitalist  class  and  the  working  class.3 

Sabotage  itself  is  no  new  thing.  What  is  new  is 
the  proposition  to  develop  the  spontaneous  acts  of 
individual  workers  in  time  of  labor  disputes  into  a 
policy  of  action,  under  the  direction  of  labor  organ- 
izations. A  striking  white-goods  worker  won  the 
applause  of  her  sister  strikers  when  she  announced 
that  she  had  spent  the  day  in  a  struck  factory  sewing 
the  left  legs  of  underdrawers  to  left  legs  and  right 
legs  to  right.  She  had  not  been  directed  to  do  this 
by  her  union  and  she  would  have  been  surprised  to 
hear  that  her  action  had  a  name  and  back  of  its  name 
was  a  philosophy.  She  did  spontaneously  what  many 
strikers  before  her  had  done  and  on  their  own  impulse. 
Her  act  was  in  its  nature  a  prank  which  "  served 
the  boss  right."  As  he  had  said  he  liked  the  work 
of  unskilled  girls  she  declared  it  was  well  to  give  him 
a  little  more  of  it.  The  very  nature  of  strikes  invites 
such  action.  If  such  unofficial  acts  had  been  recorded 
there  would  doubtless  be  ample  opportunity  for  judg- 
ment as  to  their  value  as  a  labor  measure. 

The  spirit  of  sabotage  is  not  confined  to  the  present, 
or  to  times  of  strike,  nor  to  labor  union  action,  as 
has  been  pointed  out.  When  an  individual  worker 
is  aggrieved  over  the  lack  of   relation  between  the 


218  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

remuneration  for  a  job  and  the  amount  or  kind  of 
labor  it  requires  of  him,  it  is  not  uncommon  for  him 
to  skimp  his  service  as  far  as  possible.  This  is  the 
spirit  of  sabotage  disconnected  with  the  labor  union 
and  without  revolutionary  intent.  Giovannitti  says: 
"  A  certain  simple  thing  which  is  more  or  less  gen- 
erally practised  and  thought  very  plain  and  natural, 
as,  for  instance,  a  negro  picking  less  cotton  when  re- 
ceiving less  grub,  becomes  a  monstrous  thing,  a  crime 
and  a  blasphemy  when  it  is  openly  advocated  and  ad- 
vised." 3  When  workers  came  to  generalize  about 
conditions  of  employment  and  decided  or  rather  real- 
ized that  speeding  up  resulted  in  wage  reductions  and 
when  they  tacitly  agreed  among  themselves  without 
organization  to  "  go  slow  "  they  were  practising  sabot- 
age even  if  it  did  not  deserve  the  name  of  a  revolu- 
tionary measure. 

Pouget  points  out  that  "  ca  cannie  "  was  preached 
to  workers  through  a  pamphlet  issued  in  1895  which 
declared  that  if  labor  was  to  be  treated  like  a  com- 
modity in  the  market,  labor  like  other  commodities 
would  give  poor  service  for  poor  prices. 

Sabotage  is  no  new  thing.  It  is  probably  as  old  as 
labor  performed  for  others.  Why  is  it  considered 
a  menace?  Giovannitti  answers:  "It  is  simply  be- 
cause there  is  no  danger  in  any  act  in  itself  when  it  is 
determined  by  natural  instinctive  impulse  and  is  quite 
unconscious  and  unpremeditated,  it  only  becomes  dan- 
gerous when  it  becomes  the  translated  practical  ex- 


SABOTAGE  219 

pression  of  an  idea  even  through  or  rather  because 
this  idea  has  originated  from  the  act  itself."  4 

Sabotage  as  an  organized  method  in  the  United 
States  is  in  an  early  stage  of  advocacy.  Its  actual 
use  according  to  those  preaching  it  is  negligible. 
A  speaker  for  the  Industrial  Workers  "  told  the 
striking  silk  workers  in  Paterson  that  if  starva- 
tion forced  them  back  to  the  slavery  and  growing 
degradation  from  which  they  had  revolted,  if 
their  strike  were  lost,  if  the  hunger  of  their 
children  broke  their  power  of  resistance,  they  should 
use  sabotage  in  the  mills  and  in  the  dye  shops." 5 
No  workers  were  arrested  for  committing  sabotage 
nor  was  it  known  that  any  sabotage  was  com- 
mitted in  Paterson,  but  the  advocate  was  arrested, 
sentenced  to  hard  labor  in  prison  and  fined  under  what 
is  known  as  the  "  Anarchy  Statutes."  No  act  resulted 
from  his  speech  but  he  was  sentenced  for  advocating 
destruction.  He  did  not  advocate  destruction  but  in- 
jury. The  court  made  no  distinction.  The  sabotage 
issue  before  the  law  is  at  present  an  issue  of  free 
speech. 

But  should  sabotage  extend  to  destruction  as  a 
revolutionary  measure  it  has  its  defence :  "  If  the  in- 
struments of  production  rightfully  belong  to  the 
workers,  it  means  that  they  have  been  pilfered  from 
them  and  that  the  capitalist  class  detains  them  in  an 
immoral  way.  It  is  legal  for  the  bourgeois  to  keep 
them  in  accordance  to  its  own  laws,  but  surely  it  is  not 


220  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

'  ethically  justifiable  '  from  the  point  of  view  of  our 
aforesaid  comrades  (the  Socialists).  If  these  instru- 
ments of  production  are  ours  they  are  so  as  much 
now  as  they  will  be  a  hundred  years  hence.  Also 
being  our  property  we  can  do  with  it  whatever  we 
best  please,  we  can  run  them  for  our  own  good  as 
we  surely  will;  but  if  we  so  choose  we  can  also  smash 
them  to  pieces.  It  may  be  stupid  but  it  is  not  dis- 
honest. The  fact  that  the  burglars  have  them  in  their 
temporary  possession  does  not  in  the  least  impeach 
our  clear  title  of  ownership.  We  are  not  strong 
enough  to  get  them  back  just  now  but  we  cannot 
forego  any  chances  of  getting  something  out  of 
them."  6 

But  the  Industrial  Workers  consider  destruction 
"  stupid  "  and  it  is  the  intention  to  direct  its  use,  as 
the  French  syndicates  have  directed  it  through  the  aid 
of  the  skilled  workers.  Their  purpose  is  to  put  a 
machine  "  out  of  commission  "  temporarily,  to  delay 
production  as  a  strike  delays  it;  they  propose  to  injure 
the  profits  in  materials  by  lowering  the  quality  of 
workmanship  for  the  time  being  or  until  such  time 
as  an  employer  will  concede  demands.  There  is  no 
ground  for  the  assumption  that  the  carefully  planned 
injury  would  have  destructive  effects  on  the  worker's 
character.  His  injurious  or  destructive  act  is  com- 
mitted to  prevent  other  injury  or  destruction  which  is 
to  him  far  more  injurious  and  destructive.  He 
destroys   or   injures   a  machine  as  an  owner  would 


SABOTAGE  221 

destroy   it   if   its   continued   operation    was    destruc- 
tive. 

The  Industrial  Workers  are  less  concerned  at 
present  with  the  practice  than  they  are  with  incul- 
cating their  conception  of  it.  They  recognize  it 
as  the  refinement  of  industrial  warfare  and  believe 
that  its  clumsy  or  unintelligent  use  would  do  more 
harm  to  their  cause  than  a  postponement  of  the  use 
until  the  workers  understand  it  as  a  weapon  as  they 
now  understand  a  strike. 


CHAPTER  XVII 
LIMITATION  OF  OUTPUT 

Restriction  of  production  by  capital,  by  labor — Labor  restrictions 
a  defense  against  wage  reductions — Speeding  up  and  cutting 
wage  rates — Experience  of  Bricklayers — Turning  the  saving 
from  machine  production  to  labor's  account — Restrictions  on 
entrance  to  trades — I.  W.  W.  opposition  to  restrictions  on 
labor. 

Whatever  may  be  the  social  results  of  production, 
the  original  object  of  the  promoters  as  well  as  the 
workers  is  self  interest.  Capital  withdraws  from 
wealth-creating  enterprises  or  extends  them,  depend- 
ing solely  on  the  comparative  ability  of  the  industry 
to  create  profits.  When  labor  undertakes  to  regulate 
production  in  the  interest  of  wages,  it  is  often  as- 
sumed that  production  is  not  a  matter  of  individual 
enterprise,  but  of  social  concern. 

Capital  undertakes  to  create,  determine,  and  supply 
the  market  for  the  consumption  of  goods  on  terms 
advantageous  to  itself.  One  of  its  methods  of  in- 
creasing the  market  is  to  decrease  the  cost  of  pro- 
duction. The  largest  item  in  that  cost  is  labor.  The 
greater  the  number  of  workers  who  compete  for  a 
job,  the  lower  will  be  the  wage  rate  or  the  labor 
cost.  Capital  restricts  production  and  the  amount 
of  labor  it  will  buy. 

222 


LIMITATION  OF  OUTPUT  223 

Labor  finds  itself  at  the  mercy  of  organized  capital 
in  possession  of  an  industry,  as  in  the  manufacture  of 
steel  and  its  products;  or  at  the  mercy  of  competing 
capital,  as  in  the  sewing  trades.  Through  the  ma- 
nipulations of  capital,  new  and  changing  groups  of 
workers  with  different  standards  and  nationalities  are 
kept  competing  against  each  other,  as  in  the  textile 
trade.  For  several  generations  labor  has  struggled 
against  underemployment  caused  by  the  sudden  intro- 
duction of  new  machinery  or  methods  of  manufacture. 
The  workers  have  undertaken  to  protect  their  oppor- 
tunity to  earn  a  living  by  limiting  or  restricting  the 
schemes  of  production.  Critics  of  labor-union 
restriction  of  output,  point  out  that  every  yard  of 
silk  unwoven  which  might  have  been  woven,  and 
every  ton  of  coal  unmined,  leaves  the  world  poorer. 
To  those  who  do  not  mine  coal  or  weave  silk,  this 
observation  seems  self-evident. 

The  silk  weavers  or  the  miners  have  discovered 
through  experience  that  they  are  actually  poorer  if 
they  reach  or  sustain  a  maximum  in  the  weaving  of 
silk  or  mining  coal.  They  do  not  measure  their  loss 
in  terms  of  physical  exhaustion,  which  a  maximum 
output  might  well  demand.  They  measure  their  loss 
just  as  their  employers  measure  theirs,  in  dollars 
and  cents.  When  labor  unions  limit  speed  or  main- 
tain an  average,  they  are  acting  on  the  common  ex- 
perience of  labor  that  piece  rates,  which  are  left  to  the 
manipulation  of  capital,  are  invariably  cut. 


224  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

Every  well  developed  industry  offers  illustrations 
of  this  practice.  In  the  silk  and  cotton  mills  in  the 
unorganized  textile  centers  of  the  country,  the 
workers  have  found  it  unsafe  to  hand  in  on  pay  day 
receipt  checks  for  more  than  a  certain  number  of 
pounds,  or  yards,  of  goods  produced  during  the  week. 
In  other  words,  if  the  total  number  of  a  worker's 
receipt  checks  represents  more  than  the  prevailing 
wage  paid  the  class  to  which  he  belongs,  he  finds  that 
in  the  end  it  is  to  his  advantage  and  to  the  advantage 
of  all  the  other  workers  to  take  actually  less  than 
the  wage  he  has  earned.  Wage  earners  have  discov- 
ered that  capital  will  continue  to  pay,  not  a  prevailing 
or  established  rate,  but  the  prevailing  weekly  wage 
at  which  labor  can  be  bought  in  the  market.  When 
it  is  discovered  that  the  best  workers  can  make  more 
per  week  than  the  prevailing  market  price,  the  rate 
for  all  is  cut  and  the  less  skilled  are  driven  to  keep 
the  pace  of  the  highest  skilled. 

The  constant  introduction  of  new  methods  as  well 
as  fresh  supplies  of  labor,  give  employers  renewed 
opportunities  to  establish  ever  increasing  standards  of 
speed.  The  latest  groups  of  workers,  whose  en- 
durance is  unimpaired  and  who  still  hold  illusions 
as  to  piece  rate  possibilities,  are  used  to  reset  the  speed. 

The  practise  of  cutting  piece  rates  to  the  market 
rate  of  wages  is  responsible  for  the  union  limitations 
on  speed.  To  meet  competition  capital  introduced 
methods  for  increasing  output  which,  unchecked,  re- 


LIMITATION  OF  OUTPUT  225 

duced  classes  of  workers  to  the  lowest  standards  of 
living.  Where  competition  was  unchecked  parasitic 
trades  resulted  in  which  the  workers  of  the  trades 
were  dependent  on  workers  in  other  trades  to  eke  out 
their  insufficient  wages;  children  were  forced  into 
factories  to  produce,  with  the  aid  of  a  machine  and 
for  a  pittance,  what  their  fathers  had  produced  for  a 
competent  wage.  An  over-full  labor  market  in  certain 
industries  was  kept  up  by  stimulating  emigration  from 
the  cheapest  labor  centers  of  the  world.  With  this 
fresh  supply  of  labor  it  has  been  possible  to  fill  rush 
orders,  and  in  many  trades  it  has  done  away  with 
stock  work  which  was  more  conducive  to  steady  sea- 
sons of  work.  Thus  unemployment  was  increased 
and  competition  among  the  workers  was  intensi- 
fied. 

The  trade  union  limitation  of  apprentices  in  many 
trades  has  regulated  the  periods  of  employment  for 
union  members  and  protected  them  from  the  extreme 
hardships  of  an  unlimited  supply  of  labor.  The  trade 
union  restriction  on  speed  has  held  a  standard  for 
union  members  in  wages  and  hours.  The  fate  of 
unorganized  labor  in  the  steel  mills  is  a  very  present 
reminder  to  labor  of  what  it  may  expect  if  it  leaves 
the  management  of  the  labor  market  to  free  competi- 
tion. The  success  of  many  of  the  unions  of  the 
American  Federation  of  Labor  is  due  to  their  adoption 
of  measures  regulating  production.  It  would  not  have 
been  possible  for  many  of  the  others  to  have  held 


226  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

their  organization  in  the  field  without  resorting  to 
the  same  protection. 

While  conditions  in  industry  to-day  are  making  it 
increasingly  difficult  for  labor  to  protect  itself  through 
limitations  on  entrance  to  a  trade,  the  strength  of 
labor  organizations  in  certain  trades  has  made  it  pos- 
sible for  some  of  the  unions  to  increase  their  wages 
and  shorten  their  hours  without  directly  limiting  out- 
put. The  Bricklayers  are  successful  in  holding  their 
high  wage  rate  and  their  short  hour  day  while  the 
employers  are  enjoying  the  freedom  of  introducing 
new  and  highly  developed  efficiency  schemes  for  speed- 
ing up  the  worker  and  increasing  the  output,  but  it  is 
a  question  among  the  men  whether  the  present  ar- 
rangement can  hold  indefinitely. 

The  experience  of  the  Bricklayers  is  unusual.  Most 
of  the  unions  enforce  restrictions  as  far  as  possible, 
and  have  found  that  with  the  weakening  of  the  re- 
strictions there  followed  a  loss  in  organization  power. 
Also,  with  few  exceptions,  the  unions  have  learned 
that  the  introduction  of  machinery  is  inevitable. 
They  recognize  that  they  can  make  better  use  of 
their  strength  in  concentrating  efforts  on  turning  some 
of  the  saving  to  their  advantage,  than  in  opposing 
its  introduction.  But  it  requires  unusual  strength  to 
meet  the  introduction  of  labor-saving  devices  and  the 
disorganization  of  the  industry  which  follows. 

A  new  machine  was  introduced  into  a  branch  of 
the   sewing    trades    where    ninety   per   cent,    of    the 


LIMITATION  OF  OUTPUT  227 

workers  are  organized.  Before  it  was  put  into  opera- 
tion, the  union  workers  insisted  that  a  rate  of  pay 
be  agreed  on  between  the  employer  and  the  operators. 
Neither  the  union  nor  the  employer  could  decide 
in  advance  what  an  operator  could  turn  out  after 
skill  had  been  gained  in  running  the  machine.  But 
the  employer  fixed  a  rate  which  he  decided  would 
yield  a  satisfactory  return,  and  the  workers  agreed 
that  this  price  would  not  decrease  the  general  wage 
rate.  To  the  surprise  of  both,  the  operators  on  the 
machine  in  a  short  time  earned  from  sixty  to  seventy- 
five  per  cent,  more  than  the  hand  workers.  The  em- 
ployer at  the  same  time  realized  a  greater  profit  on 
the  output  of  the  machine  workers  than  on  the  output 
of  the  hand  workers.  In  an  unorganized  trade,  an 
employer  would  have  appropriated  the  increase  or 
applied  it  to  a  reduction  in  the  price  of  the  com- 
modity, for  competitive  purposes,  and  would  have 
paid  the  workers  the  market  rate  of  wages.  But  in 
this  organized  trade  the  union  (which  included  ninety 
per  cent,  of  the  workers  in  the  trade)  controlled 
the  situation  and  the  wage  rate,  by  restricting  the 
entrance  of  new  workers  to  the  trade.  The  success 
of  the  Typographical  Union  in  saving  some  of  the 
advantages  of  labor  saving  machinery  for  the  worker 
is  a  too  familiar  story  to  need  repetition.  It  indicates 
what  labor  union  regulation  can  accomplish  without 
limiting  output  if  labor  organization  is  sufficiently 
strong,  but  it  was  necessary  with  the  printers  as  with 


228  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

the  union  above  mentioned  that  the  number  of  workers 
who  entered  the  trade  should  be  restricted. 

The  labor  unions  which  maintain  a  limited  appren- 
ticeship and  impose  restrictions  on  the  entrance  of 
workers  to  a  trade,  recognize  an  unlimited  labor  sup- 
ply as  an  evil  for  the  same  reason  that  capital  recog- 
nizes it  as  desirable.  If  an  unlimited  number  of 
workers  enter  a  trade,  the  seasons  of  work  are  short- 
ened and  the  wages  are  cut  by  competing  workers. 
Every  one  suffers  and  standards  of  life  disappear; 
they  eventually  fall  to  the  standard  of  cotton  mill 
communities  where  whole  families  must  work  to  secure 
the  wages  formerly  paid  to  one  worker. 

However,  the  regulation  of  entrance  to  a  trade,  or 
the  limitation  of  apprentices,  is  not  a  universal  labor 
measure.  The  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  in 
particular,  and  some  locals  of  the  American  Federa- 
tion of  Labor,  declare  that  the  trade  unions  which 
are  restricting  entrance  to  a  trade  are  opposing  in 
practice  as  well  as  in  theory  the  object  of  organiza- 
tion— the  unity  of  all  labor.  These  unions  admit  the 
effect  of  an  over-full  labor  market  on  this  trade  and 
on  that,  but  they  contend  that  it  is  the  business  of 
labor  to  disregard  trade  lines;  that  labor  only  deceives 
itself  when  it  closes  the  door  to  a  fellow  worker  and 
bids  him  work  elsewhere;  that  the  standard  it  secures 
for  one  group  by  these  restrictions  is  bought  at  the 
sacrifice  of  larger  groups;  that  the  real  significance 
of  the  labor  movement   is  lost,  and  a  limited  aris- 


LIMITATION  OF  OUTPUT  229 

tocracy  of  labor  is  established  rather  than  the  solidarity 
which  the  labor  movement  demands.  In  place  of  all 
restrictions  and  limitations  for  purposes  of  exclusive 
trade  bargaining,  they  appeal  to  the  whole  mass  to 
recognize  the  interdependence  of  all  industries,  and 
to  adopt  inclusive  methods  of  organization  to  meet  the 
conditions  of  industrial  life. 

In  direct  opposition  to  all  methods  by  labor  to  regu- 
late output,  there  comes  from  capital  the  proposition 
to  realize  through  labor  a  productive  efficiency  hitherto 
unknown.  The  promoters  of  the  movement  give  to 
their  proposition  the  name  "  scientific  management." 


CHAPTER  XVIII 
SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT 

Object — Labor  prefers  to  manage  itself — The  four  great  princi- 
ples explained  by  F.  W.  Taylor — All  familiar  to  labor — 
Proposition  to  transfer  labor  knowledge  to  management  side 
— A  scavenger — Studies  workmen  as  machines  are  studied — 
Inspiring  workmen  to  work — Bonus  and  task — Ethical  re- 
quirements— New  Capitalism — Disregard  of  wages  law — 
Union  experience  with  bonus  and  stop  watch — Rest  and 
fatigue  schemes  regarded  with  suspicion — New  definition  of 
initiative — Medical  condemnation  of  rest  schemes — Ability  of 
American  capital  to  increase  output — Aim  of  scientific  man- 
agement  is   goods,   aim  of   unions  is   men. 

Scientific  management  is  advocated  by  representa- 
tives of  capital.  It  proposes  to  increase  industrial 
output  by  managing  labor  scientifically. 

But  organized  labor  does  not  want  to  be  scientifi- 
cally managed.  It  is  not  keen  about  being  managed 
at  all.     It  exists,  in  fact,  to  manage  itself. 

Labor  controversies,  as  carried  on  by  the  American 
Federation  of  Labor,  are  demands  for  a  "  voice  "  in 
the  settlement  of  conditions  of  work.  But  this  de- 
mand is  not  recognized  by  capital  as  a  principle.  It 
is  only  recognized  as  a  necessity  when  labor,  through 
superior  strength,  secures  its  demands  in  this  trade 
and  that.  The  concession  to  labor  of  a  voice  in  de- 
termining conditions  of  work  means  by  implication 
to  capital  that  management  as  a  whole  is  still  in  its 

230 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  231 

own  hands ;  it  also  means  that  its  actual  title  to 
superior,  or  ownership  rights,  is  not  in  question. 

The  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  leaves  no 
doubt  in  the  mind  of  capital  that  it  claims  only  a 
voice  in  the  management  of  industry.  It  makes  its 
fight  on  the  grounds  of  labor's  sole  ownership,  as 
well  as  right,  to  sole  management  in  all  that  labor 
produces.  Every  strike,  every  difference  between  or- 
ganized labor  and  capital,  is  an  attempt  of  the  former 
to  wrest  management,  or  some  degree  of  management, 
from  the  latter.  Whether  it  is  an  A.  F.  of  L.  or  an 
I.  W.  W.  fight,  there  is  in  each  and  every  one  this 
issue  of  management.  The  question  of  management 
is,  in  fact,  the  labor  movement. 

If  production  is  to  be  scientifically  managed,  or- 
ganized labor  insists  that  it  shall  have  a  hand  in  the 
management,  or  it  shall  do  the  managing.  It  refuses 
to  grow  enthusiastic  over  propositions  which  are 
worked  out  for  it,  or  without  its  cooperation,  by 
others  who  claim  to  know  better  than  labor  knows 
what  is  for  its  good. 

It  was  with  something  like  pained  surprise  that 
the  advocates  of  scientific  management  discovered 
that  their  propositions  to  manage  labor  more  effi- 
ciently, and  to  lighten  its  burdens,  met  a  cold  reception 
at  the  hands  of  the  conservative,  as  well  as  the 
radical,  labor  unions.  It  is  conceivable  that  the  effi- 
ciency systems  of  scientific  management  might  admit 
the  labor  unions  in  conference  in  the  settlement  of 


232  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

conditions;  but  it  is  evident  that  nothing  is  further 
from  the  intention  of  the  promoters  of  the  science, 
and  that  such  a  proposition  would  quite  seriously 
impair  its  purpose. 

Mr.  Frederick  W.  Taylor,  the  leader  of  the  move- 
ment, states  :  "  The  greater  advantage  comes  from  the 
new  and  unheard-of  burdens  which  are  assumed  by 
the  men  in  the  management,  duties  which  have  never 
been  performed  by  the  men  or  the  management  side."  x 
These  new  duties  Mr.  Taylor  divides  into  four  large 
classes,  calling  them  "  The  Four  Principles  of  Scien- 
tific Management,"  all  of  which,  he  says,  are  necessary 
to  secure  its  object,  which  is  "  the  increased  output  per 
unit  of  human  effort." 

The  first  of  these  four  great  duties  (as  he  also  names 
them)  which  are  undertaken  by  the  management  is  to 
deliberately  gather  in  all  the  rule  of  thumb  knowledge 
which  is  possessed  by  all  the  twenty  different  kinds  of 
tradesmen  who  are  at  work  in  the  establishment.  Knowl- 
edge which  has  never  been  recorded  is  in  the  heads, 
hands  and  bodies,  in  the  knack,  skill  and  dexterity  which 
these  men  possess.  .  .  . 

The  second  of  the  new  duties  assumed  by  the  manage- 
ment is  the  scientific  selection  and  then  the  progressive 
development  of  the  workmen.  The  workmen  are  studied; 
it  may  seem  preposterous,  but  they  are  studied  just  as 
machines  have  been  studied.  .  .  . 

The  third  duty  is  to  bring  the  scientifically  selected 
workmen  and  the  science  together.  They  must  be 
brought  together;  they  will  not  come  together  without  it. 
I  do  not  wish  for  an  instant  to  have  any  one  think  I  have 
a  poor  opinion  of  a  workman ;  far  from  it.     I  merely 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  233 

state  a  fact  when  I  say  that  you  may  put  your  scientific 
methods  before  a  workman  all  you  are  a  mind  to,  and 
nine  times  out  of  ten  he  will  do  the  same  old  way  .  .  . 
when  I  say,  make  the  workman  do  his  work  in  accord- 
ance with  the  laws  of  science  I  do  not  say  make  in  an 
arbitrary  sense  ...  I  want  to  qualify  the  word  make, 
it  has  rather  a  hard  sound.  Some  one  must  inspire  the 
man  to  make  the  change.  .  .  . 

The  fourth  principle  is  a  deliberate  division  of  the 
work  which  was  formerly  done  by  the  workman  into  two 
sections,  one  of  which  is  handed  over  to  the  manage- 
ment. An  immense  mass  of  new  duties  is  thrown  on 
the  management,  which  formerly  belonged  to  the  work- 
men .  .  .  requiring  cooperation  between  the  manage- 
ment and  the  workmen,  which  accounts  more  than  any- 
thing else  for  the  fact  that  there  has  never  been  a  strike 
under  scientific  management.  ...  In  one  of  our  ma- 
chine shops,  for  instance,  where  we  do  miscellaneous 
work  .  .  .  there  will  be  at  least  one  man  on  the  man- 
agement side  for  every  three  workmen.  .  .  .2 

Each  one  of  these  "  scientific  "  propositions  is  per- 
fectly familiar  to  the  workman  in  spite  of  the  rather 
naive  assurance  of  the  efficiency  engineers  that  they 
are  new.  He  has  known  them  in  slightly  different 
guise  for  a  century  past.  The  new  thing  is  the  propo- 
sition to  develop  what  has  been  in  the  past  the  tricks 
of  the  trade  into  a  principle  of  production.  Scientific 
management  logically  follows  and  completes  the 
factory  process. 

The  first  and  fourth  of  Mr.  Taylor's  great  duties 
or  principles  is  to  deliberately  gather  in  all  the  rule 
of  thumb  knowledge  of  all  workmen,   and  transfer 


234  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

this  knowledge  to  the  management.  That  is  exactly 
what  machinery  did  and  is  still  doing  to  craft  workers. 
It  usurped  the  knowledge  of  the  worker  and  trans- 
ferred that  knowledge  to  the  management.  The  great 
discovery  of  scientific  management  is  that  machinery 
is  not  absorbing  completely,  or  as  completely  as  it 
should,  a  workman's  trade  knowledge. 

Mr.  Taylor  says :  "  This  knowledge  is  the  greatest 
asset  that  a  workman  possesses.  It  is  his  capital."  a 
The  task  which  efficiency  engineers  have  set  them- 
selves is  to  gather  up  the  last  vestiges  of  capital 
possessed  by  the  workingman,  and  place  it  for  safe 
keeping  and  efficiency  under  The  Management. 

There  is  an  impression  that  all  efficiency  methods 
originate  in  the  brains  of  efficiency  engineers,  or 
with  the  management.  Mr.  Taylor  is  not  alone  in 
assuring  us  that  the  methods  are  discovered  in  the 
heads  and  in  the  hands  of  the  workers,  that  they 
are  the  result  of  the  worker's  experience  in  very  great 
degree. 

The  following  story  was  told  by  a  manufacturer 
as  an  illustration : 

A  shoe  manufacturer  told  one  girl  that  he  wanted  to  see 
how  much  she  could  do.  .  .  .  She  said :  "  Well,  there  is  a 
certain  kind  of  a  filler  that  I  used  in  another  factory. 
If  you  will  use  that  kind  of  a  filler  I  can  do  my  work 
so  much  more  quickly.  Another  thing,  the  paper  you 
are  using  on  that  tip  is  too  coarse.  If  you  will  use  a 
finer  paper  I  won't  have  to  use  so  much  filler."  The 
story  concluded :  "  So  that  girl  and  this  manufacturer 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  235 

worked  out  a  condition  that  made  it  easier  for  her  to 
perform  more  work."4 

Scientific  management  is  a  good  scavenger.  It  is 
out  for  every  scrap  of  trade  knowledge.  Following 
the  machine,  it  proposes  to  clean  up  the  last  vestige 
of  craftsmanship  and  to  put  the  shipshape  touches 
to  modern  industry.  There  are  to  be  no  chance  bits 
of  capital  lying  around  loose  in  the  hands  of  this 
man  and  that  when  the  efficiency  engineers  have 
finished  their  job. 

The  second  and  third  of  the  Four  Principles  show 
how  this  is  done.  Mr.  Taylor  says :  "  The  workmen 
are  '  studied  '  just  as  machines  have  been  studied." 
And,  finally,  it  is  necessary  "  to  bring  the  scientifically 
selected  workman  and  the  science  together  "  by  "  in- 
spiring "  the  workman. 

The  workman  is  to  be  scientifically  selected  by  a 
teacher  instead  of  by  a  foreman;  he  is  to  be 
"  studied  "  by  this  teacher,  as  well  as  taught,  and 
the  "  unit  of  human  effort  "  is  to  be  squeezed  out  of 
him  by  observing  the  law  of  rest  and  fatigue. 

He  is  to  be  inspired  by  the  same  old  bonus  of  the 
same  old  task  system  in  which  he  has  served  his  time. 
But  the  bonus  or  rate,  according  to  efficiency  en- 
gineers, is  never  to  be  cut.  as  it  has  been  cut  in  the 
past  by  employers  who  speeded  up  their  workers. 
If  the  old-time  employer  ever  made  so  gentlemanly 
a  promise  regarding  the  continuous  payment  of  a 
bonus,  he  knew  he  could  not  keep  it.     He  knew  that 


236  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

even  out  of  the  goodness  of  his  heart  he  could  not 
indefinitely  continue  a  bonus  or  a  rate  which  his  com- 
petitors did  not  pay. 

But  apparently  scientific  management  requires  of 
industry  certain  ethical  standards.  Mr.  Taylor  says 
that  scientific  management  involves  a  complete  revolu- 
tion, both  on  the  part  of  the  management  and  of  the 
men;  a  complete  change  in  the  mental  attitude  on 
both  sides.  Labor  would  agree  with  Mr.  Taylor,  and 
add  that  it  would  require  as  well  a  mental  revolution 
in  Wall  Street.  Apparently  this  is  what  the  "  New 
Capitalism,"  of  which  scientific  management  is  a  part, 
does  require. 

"  New  Capitalism  "  proposes  to  disregard  the  law  of 
wages,  and  to  substitute  a  beneficent  law  which  pays 
better  wages,  also  better  profits.  But  the  results  have 
not  as  yet  justified  the  workers  in  surrendering 
their  own  agencies  for  self-protection.  As  yet  labor 
is  unconscious  of  any  sloughing  off  in  hardships  under 
the  law  of  supply  and  demand.  It  is  not  conscious 
that  the  introduction  of  methods  which  have  for 
their  object  the  "  increased  output  of  human  effort  " 
has  had  any  appreciable  connection  with  wages  or 
wage  rates. 

Union  men  cite  numberless  cases  where  efficiency 
methods  have  been  introduced,  like  the  task  and  bonus 
systems,  the  stop  watch,  the  observation  of  the  laws 
of  rest  and  fatigue,  and  yet  wage  rates  were  not 
increased,  but  were,  in  the  course  of  time,  reduced. 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  237 

The  efficiency  engineer  answers :  "  Ah,  then  that  is 
not  scientific  management ! "  But  he  will  state  in 
conventions  to  other  efficiency  engineers  that  he  has 
great  trouble  in  getting  the  management  to  carry  out 
the  end  of  their  program  which  will  insure  the  worker 
the  receipt  of  his  bonus.  An  efficiency  promoter  ob- 
served on  one  of  these  occasions :  "  I  have  had  so 
many  letters  from  people  who  look  on  scientific  man- 
agement as  a  new  instrument  by  which  they  could 
squeeze  a  little  more  out  of  the  workman  and  give  him 
no  return.  I  do  not  want  to  have  anything  to  do  with 
them.    We  must  share  what  we  get."  5 

Organized  labor  appreciates  the  wish,  but  recog- 
nizes the  difficulty  for  an  efficiency  engineer  to  be 
an  engineer  and  a  financier  in  action  at  one  and  the 
same  time.  It  is  not  the  efficiency  engineer  who  can 
fulfill  his  own  promise.  He  must  leave  it  to  the 
capitalists  to  "  share  what  they  get "  of  the  new 
capital  which  the  engineer  has  collected  out  of  the 
hands  or  brains  of  the  workers. 

In  scientifically  managed  plants  there  is  no  change 
whatever  in  the  status  of  capital  and  labor,  except 
the  extended  enslavement  of  the  latter.  Efficiency 
engineers  might  successfully  promote  scientific  man- 
agement by  advertising  their  hope  that  the  manage- 
ment will  "  share  what  it  gets  "  if  the  factory  system 
had  been  a  less  efficient  teacher.  But  the  factory 
system  has  taught  the  workers  by  a  series  of  object 
lessons.     Labor  unions  represent  those  workers  who 


238  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

have  learned  that  they  must  rely  on  schemes  for  relief 
which  they  themselves  initiate  or  control. 

The  rest  and  fatigue  schemes  of  scientific  manage- 
ment are  especially  worthy  of  suspicion.  These 
schemes  propose  to  finish  the  job  of  reducing  the 
laborer  to  a  machine  attachment,  to  rob  him  of  what 
little  initiative  may  be  left  him  in  a  certain  freedom 
of  motion.  Mr.  Taylor  defines  his  idea  of  initiative. 
He  says :  "  The  manufacturer  who  has  any  intelli- 
gence must  realize  that  his  first  duty  should  be  to 
obtain  the  initiative  of  all  these  tradesmen  who  are 
working  under  him;  to  obtain  their  hard  work,  their 
good  will,  their  ingenuity,  their  determination  to  treat 
the  employer's  business  as  if  it  were  their  own.  And  in 
this  connection  I  wish  to  strain  the  meaning  of  the 
word  '  initiative  '  to  indicate  all  of  these  good  quali- 
ties." 6  Mr.  Taylor  is  very  much  in  earnest  in  this. 
His  rather  violent  use  of  the  word  "  initiative  "  sug- 
gests the  possibility  that  efficiency  engineers  are  rather 
given  to  doing  violence  to  other  terms,  such  as  rest 
and  fatigue. 

But  to  return  to  initiative.  One  of  the  advo- 
cates of  scientific  management  considers  it  an  error 
to  suppose  that  where  efficiency  methods  have  not 
been  introduced  there  is  any  initiative  left  the  worker, 
and  says  there  is  nothing  intellectually  stimulating  in 
leaving  a  worker  free  to  go  after  and  select  his  own 
tools.  This  trifling  idea  of  freedom,  the  last  left  the 
worker,  is  foolishly  guarded.     He  says  the  machine 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  239 

does  not  waste  time  in  planning;  it  proceeds  at  once 
to  performance,  and  that  is  what  the  man  must  be 
made  to  do.  Contrast  the  mental  state  of  two  car- 
penters, although  neither  is  worthy  of  mention  or 
comparison,  according  to  the  science  of  efficiency. 
One  of  the  carpenters  decides  on  his  tools,  places  them 
according  to  his  choice,  and  marks  off  his  work.  That 
is  the  inefficient  carpenter.  The  efficient  carpenter  is 
assigned  a  place,  handed  his  tools  or  his  hammer  and 
nails,  his  nail  holes  are  marked  out.  Under  the  eye 
of  a  teacher  he  follows  instructions  for  successive 
hours  with  intermissions  prescribed.  This  man  is  not 
a  carpenter.  He  is  not  a  man.  He  is  the  dynamo 
of  the  hammer  he  holds. 

American  Medicine  comments  editorially  on  the 
result  to  labor  of  efficiency  schemes  to  relieve  it  of 
"  wasted  "  effort : 

Working  along  with  his  partner,  "  the  efficiency  en- 
gineer," the  speeder-up,  has  managed  to  obtain  from  the 
factory  worker  a  larger  output  in  the  same  period  of 
time.  This  is  done  by  eliminating  the  so-called  super- 
fluous motions  of  the  arms  and  fingers,  i.e.,  those 
which  do  not  contribute  directly  to  the  fashioning  of 
the  article  under  process  of  manufacture.  .  .  .  The 
movements  thought  to  be  superfluous  simply  represent 
nature's  attempt  to  rest  the  strained  and  tired  muscles. 
Whenever  the  muscles  of  the  arms  and  fingers,  or  of 
any  part  of  the  body  for  that  matter,  undertake  to  do 
a  definite  piece  of  work,  it  is  physiologically  imperative 
that  they  do  not  accomplish  it  by  the  shortest  mathematical 
route.    A  rigid  to  and  fro  movement  is  possible  only  to 


240  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

machinery;  muscles  necessarily  move  in  curves  and 
that  is  why  grace  is  characteristic  of  muscular  move- 
ment and  is  absent  from  a  machine.  The  more  finished 
the  technique  of  a  workman  and  the  greater  his  strength, 
the  more  graceful  are  his  movements,  and,  what  is  im- 
portant in  this  connection,  vice  versa.  A  certain  flourish, 
superfluous  only  to  the  untrained  eye,  is  absolutely 
characteristic  of  the  efficient  workman's  motions. 

"  Speeding-up  "  eliminates  grace  and  the  curved  move- 
ment of  physiological  repose  and  thus  induces  an  ir- 
resistible fatigue,  first  in  the  small  muscles,  second,  in 
the  trunk,  ultimately  in  the  brain  and  nervous  system. 
The  early  result  is  a  fagged  and  spiritless  worker  of  the 
very  sort  that  the  "  speeder-up's  "  partner,  the  "  efficiency 
engineer,"  will  be  anxious  to  replace  by  a  younger  and 
fresher  candidate,  who  in  his  turn  will  soon  follow  his 
predecessor  if  the  same  relentless  process  is  enforced. 

It  will  always  be  necessary  to  consider  workers  as 
human  beings,  and  charity  and  moderation  in  the  exac- 
tion of  results  will  usually  be  found  the  part  of  wisdom, 
as  representing  a  wise  economy  of  resources.  This 
scientific  charity,  however,  is  something  quite  apart  from 
the  moral  effect  on  the  personnel  of  due  recognition  of 
their  long  service  and  of  the  loyalty  which  is  likely  to 
accompany  it.7 


All  propositions  to  increase  wealth  make  an  appeal 
to  imagination.  No  one,  certainly  not  organized 
labor,  doubts  the  ability  of  American  capitalists  to 
discover  new  schemes  for  increasing  the  output,  nor 
of  the  American  workman  to  produce  it.  It  has  been 
reported  that  the  labor  cost  of  production  in  England, 
with  its  lower  wage  rates,  is  higher  than  the  cost  in 
America,  because  the  American  workmen,  through  the 


SCIENTIFIC  MANAGEMENT  241 

pressure  of  management,  yield  an  amount  per  worker 
unknown  to  English  labor.  Scientific  management 
proposes  to  increase  this  yield  by  several  hundred 
per  cent. 

Workers  looking  back  a  generation  or  two  may 
admit  that  with  the  introduction  of  machine  processes 
they  have  here  and  there  reaped  a  harvest  of  several 
cotton  shirts  instead  of  one  woolen,  a  standing  lamp 
instead  of  the  ancestral  candlestick,  and,  as  clear 
gain,  a  Victor  talking  machine.  But  no  one  is  ever 
jubilant  over  luxuries  which  they  have  bought  with 
their  lives.  It  is  organized  labor  alone  that  remem- 
bers the  ghastly  price  paid  for  increased  consumption; 
the  generations  of  men,  women,  and  children  who 
have  been  maimed  and  murdered  in  the  process. 
Greed  and  desire,  not  the  well-being  of  labor,  are  still 
the  motive  forces  back  of  increased  wealth  production. 
If  we  are  about  to  enter  upon  an  era  of  a  "  New  Cap- 
italism ;'  which  recognizes  that  it  will  pay  to  increase 
the  number  of  cotton  shirts  without  exacting  so  heavy 
a  toll  as  has  been  exacted  in  the  past,  organized  labor 
still  demands  that  it  shall  determine,  or  have  a  voice 
in  determining,  what  that  toll  shall  be  and  what 
shall  be  the  reward. 

Scientific  management,  the  promoters  say,  recog- 
nizes no  difference  in  determining  standards  of  effi- 
ciency between  management,  capital  goods  and  labor. 
Well  and  good;  labor  does. 

Organized  labor's  observations  of  a  worker  do  not 


242  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

end  with  the  day's  work.  They  extend  over  the  wear 
and  tear  of  a  lifetime.  They  take  into  consideration 
a  worker's  ability  to  react  after  work,  mentally  as  well 
as  physically.  They  take  into  consideration  the 
worker's  ability  to  realize  his  maximum  in  his  non- 
laboring  hours.  And  they  would  also  consider  his 
ability  to  realize  his  maximum  in  his  laboring  hours 
if  labor  had  an  opportunity  to  fix  a  maximum  con- 
sistent with  the  life  interests  of  labor  as  a  whole. 
The  difference  between  scientific  management  and 
organized  labor  is  that  the  aim  of  the  latter  is  to 
make  men,  the  aim  of  the  former  is  to  make  goods. 


CHAPTER  XIX 
LABOR  IN  POLITICS 

Socialist  Party  efforts  to  commit  labor  unions — Original  policy 
of  A.  F.  of  L.  aloof  from  all  political  action — Reversed 
policy — Entered  practical  politics,  not  partizan — Election  of 
union  card  men — Radical  political  declaration  of  Washing- 
ton State  Federation — Opposition  of  I.  W.  W.  to  all  political 
affiliations. 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor,  as  a  national 
organization,  refrained  from  all  political  activity  until 
recently  and  still  refuses  allegiance  to  any  one  party. 
Socialist  Party  representatives  have  worked  indus- 
triously to  secure  the  indorsement  of  the  Socialist 
position,  as  well  as  of  the  Socialist  Party,  on  the 
ground  that  it  was  the  only  political  party  which 
stood  unequivocally  for  labor.  The  Federation  has 
not  only  resisted  the  "  Socialist  element,"  as  it  is 
derisively  called;  it  has  attacked  it  with  bitterness, 
and  in  much  the  same  spirit  as  it  attacks  the  sworn 
enemies  of  the  capitalist  class.  The  National  Ex- 
ecutive of  the  Federation,  at  its  convention  of  1912, 
commented  on  an  event  of  the  past  year  as  follows : 
"  What  could  be  expected  from  the  National  Manu- 
facturers' Association,  their  agents  and  their  hirelings? 
.  .  .  What  from  the  Socialists,  except  to  em- 
ploy the  occasion  for  vote  catching?    What  from  such 

243 


244  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

reactionary  organs  as  the  New  York  Sun  but  diatribes? 
....  So  long  as  these  declared  enemies  of  the 
trade  unions  are  what  they  are,  and  unionism  is  what 
it  is,  no  help  can  come  from  them  to  the  labor 
movement."  1 

The  Federation  has  borne  many  undeserved  accusa- 
tions, but  it  has  officially  kept  itself  free  from  the 
/  "  Socialist  element."  While  this  "  element  "  has  in- 
creased within  the  membership  of  the  Federation,  and 
\  while  it  polls  a  one-third  vote  at  the  conventions,  the 
Federation  has  successfully  resisted  all  attempts  to 
commit  it  to  the  Socialist  Party. 

Various  organizations  affiliated  with  the  American 
Federation,  especially  the  city  organizations,  in  dif- 
ferent parts  of  the  country,  have  indorsed  and  worked 
for  the  election  of  candidates  to  municipal  office  on 
the  ground  that  they  would  favor  the  interests  of 
organized  labor  if  elected.  Local  politicians  through- 
out the  country  have  sought  and  placed  high  value 
on  the  support  of  the  local  trade  union  men  and 
their  organizations. 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor  as  a  national 
organization  withheld  its  indorsement  of  candidates 
for  national  office,  and  refrained  from  active  par- 
ticipation in  elections.  It  feared  that  political  ac- 
tivities might  divert  its  energies  and  divide  its 
ranks;  it  feared  that  a  political  campaign  might 
impair  its  united  front;  it  feared  also  political  en- 
tanglements and  attacks  on  its  reputation  for  single- 


LABOR  IN  POLITICS  245 

ness  of  purpose,  which  many  of  its  local  organizations 
had  experienced  on  account  of  their  political  alli- 
ances. 

It  was  in  1906  that  the  American  Federation  of  ./ 
Labor  reversetTns  policy  and  entered  the  field  of 
what  it  calls  practical  politics  in  contradistinction  to 
partizan  politics.  The  policy  first  adopted  was  to 
induce  one  of  the  regular  parties  to  nominate  on  a 
regular  party  ticket  a  member  of  the  Federation  as 
a  representative  to  Congress.  Efforts  were  made  in 
every  state  to  secure  these  nominations.  From  1906 
to  1910  ten  "  union  card  men  "  were  elected,  owing 
political  allegiance  to  either  the  Democratic  or  Repub- 
lican Party  as  its  candidate. 

The  Federation  took  the  position  that  the  allegiance 
of  these  representatives  to  their  political  parties  would 
not  interfere  with  their  support  of  measures  of  interest 
to  the  Federation  and  organized  labor  generally. 
This  policv  was_caxrJed  against  a  storm  of  Socialist 
opposition.  \In  1910  the  Federation  adopted  the  slo-  \.^ 
gan,  "  stand  iaithiully  by  our  friends,  oppose  and 
defeat  our  enemies,  whether  they  be  candidates  for 
President,  for  Congress  or  for  other  offices,  whether 
executive,  legislative  or  judicial." 

The  opponents  of  such  political  action,  others  as 
well  as  the  Socialists,  within  the  Federation,  claimed 
that  the  Federation's  indorsement  of  the  Presidential 
candidate  for  1908  and  its  failure  to  carry  the  elec- 
tion, weakened  the  position  of  the  trade  unions  in 


246  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

their    legitimate    field    of    bargaining    for    terms    of 
employment. 

The  President  of  the  Federation,  in  his  message 
to  the  convention  of  1912,  said: 

The  American  Federation  of  Labor  is  not  partizan  to 
any  political  party,  but  it  is  partizan  to  a  principle — to 
achieve  results  in  the  interests  of  the  great  mass  of  the 
wage  earners  of  our  continent.  It  resents  the  attitude 
of  those  who  seek  to  force  the  workers  back  into  the 
condition  and  character  of  serfdom,  and  with  equal 
insistence  it  refuses  to  postpone  to  the  far  future  the 
advantages  and  benefits  of  a  better  life  which  we  pro- 
pose to  secure  them  here  and  now. 

Taking  into  consideration  that  which  organized  labor 
has  already  accomplished  upon  the  economic,  political, 
and  legislative  fields  to  bring  light  and  life  into  the  homes 
and  workshops  of  the  toiling  masses,  we  are  fully  con- 
fident of  greater  success  in  the  future.  The  spirit  and 
humanitarianism  cultivated  and  developed  by  the  or- 
ganized labor  movement  will  find  its  full  fruition  in  the 
material,  social,  and  moral  standards  of  our  people,  and 
will  be  crystallized  in  the  written  laws  of  our  land  and 
the  unwritten  laws  of  our  daily  lives. 2 

It  was  in  this  tone  that  the  President  strained 
every  effort  to  carry  the  delegates  and  to  secure  an 
enthusiastic  support  of  the  political  policy  and  the 
political  action  of  the  officers  of  the  Federation. 
The  policy  and  the  action  were  indorsed,  but  not 
unanimously. 

This  policy  advocated  by  the  Federation  was  op- 
posed by  the  Socialist  members  of  the  Federation,  who 


LABOR  IN  POLITICS  247 

took  the  position  that  labor  as  a  class  must  control 
its  political  representatives  through  a  political  organ- 
ization of  its  own  as  they  controlled  their  representa- 
tives in  their  trade  organizations.  The  Washington 
State  Federation,  chartered  by  the  American  Federa- 
tion, at  its  convention  of  19 13,  openly  refuted  the 
policy  of  its  national  organization  of  supporting  can- 
didates pledged  to  one  of  the  regular  parties.  It 
resolved : 

Whereas,  the  political  parties  now  in  control  of  our 
government  are  owned  and  controlled  by  our  industrial 
masters  .  .  . 

Whereas,  the  masters  recognize  the  value  of  con- 
trol of  the  state,  and  secure  and  maintain  their  control 
by  electing  members  of  their  class  to  office,  legislative, 
executive,  and  judicial.   .    .    . 

Whereas,  the  statement  that  the  interests  of  capital 
and  labor  are  identical  is  absurdly  false,  and  is  intended 
to  blind  the  workers  to  their  own  interests  and  to  mis- 
lead them  into  giving  support  to  interests  diametrically 
opposed  to  their  own ; 

Therefore  be  it  Resolved,  that  we  recommend  to  the 
workers  that  they  vote  for  members  of  their  own  class  to 
fill  all  legislative,  executive,  or  judicial  positions.   .    .    .3 

The  Washington  State  Federation  stands  alone 
among  the  state  organizations  of  the  Federation  in 
its  revolutionary  position  and  opposition  to  the  more 
conservative  and  opportunistic  policy. 

The  Industrial  Workers  of  the  World  opposes  all 
allegiance  to  political  parties  or  indorsement  of  polit- 


248  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

ical  action.  Its  theory  of  "  Direct  Action  "  is  not 
necessarily  a  substitute  for  political  action,  as  it  is 
considered  by  many  of  its  members,  but  it  is  the 
exclusive  method  of  the  organization. 


> 


CHAPTER  XX 
DIRECT  ACTION 

Is  the  antithesis  of  political  action  but  not  necessarily  opposed  to 
it — Comparative  value  as  a  labor  weapon — Object  of  direct 
action — Present  advocacy  opportune. 

Direct  action  is  not  necessarily  opposed  to  political 
action,  although  the  term  originated  in  the  desire  to 
distinguish  between  organized  labor's  efforts  to  secure 
its  objects  by  more  direct  methods  than  political 
representation. 

It  arose  out  of  labor's  disappointment  in  the  efforts 
it  had  expended  politically.  Labor  had  found  that  its 
representatives  sitting  in  state  councils  rife  with 
the  doctrines  and  influences  of  a  capitalist  society, 
gradually  lost  the  point  of  view  of  those  whom  they 
were  there  to  represent. 

It  found  also  that  political  action,  delegating,  as 
it  does  of  necessity,  all  action  to  representatives, 
offered  the  mass  of  the  workers  little  if  any  oppor- 
tunity for  experience  or  initiative  in  the  solution  of 
their  own  problems.  Direct  actionists  claim  that  the 
object  of  the  labor  movement  is  to  minimize  the 
delegation  of  power  and  to  increase  the  power  of 
the  mass  of  the  workers,  individually  and  collect- 
ively.    The  plaint  of  labor  is,  in  fact,  that  one  group 

249 


250  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

of  people  has  assumed  the  direction  and  management 
of  affairs  of  another  group,  that  capital  manages  and 
speaks  for  labor,  with  a  consequent  weakness  to  labor 
of  unused  or  enslaved  powers. 

Labor  can  only  learn  to  do  by  doing,  is  the  idea 
back  of  direct  action.  Representation  gives  labor  no 
exercise  and  no  opportunities  to  develop. 

Even  should  political  representatives  legislate  in  the 
interests  of  labor,  and  even  were  it  possible  for  repre- 
sentatives to  hold  and  keep  the  labor  point  of  view, 
they  would  not  meet  labor's  chief  need :  the  oppor- 
tunity to  exercise  its  own  faculties  and  to  develop 
initiative.  What  labor  wants  above  all  else  is  to  gain 
in  strength,  the  strength  to  do,  and  this  is  in  itself 
more  important  than  all  the  material  advantages 
which  might  accrue  through  a  Socialist  state  or  a 
benevolent  plutocracy. 

This  is  the  gist  of  the  theory  of  direct  action, 
and,  unmodified,  is  the  theory  of  anarchism,  which  is 
opposed  in  principle  to  delegated  power.  But  all 
direct  actionists  do  not  oppose  political  action,  and 
many  indorse  it.  All  direct  actionists  see  or  feel  the 
necessity  of  organizations  of  labor  which  provide  a 
large  measure  of  latitude  for  initiative  of  the  workers 
in  their  struggle  with  capital,  of  organizations  which 
provide  for  the  maximum  amount  of  mass  action. 
But  all  object  to  the  tendency  of  political  action  to  rob 
rather  than  supply  the  workers  with  opportunities  to 
test  and  exercise  their  own  powers. 


DIRECT  ACTION  251 

Direct  actionists  also  claim  that  political  action  is 
an  instrument  which  people  with  formal  education, 
sophisticated  people,  can  handle  more  successfully  and 
deftly  than  people  who  have  never  directed  others. 
Moreover,  labor's  representatives,  and  those  politically 
active  in  labor's  interests,  are  invariably  men  and 
women  who  are  more  or  less  removed  from  the 
intenser  forms  of  industrial  employment,  and  many 
of  them  are  people  whose  knowledge  of  the  labor  need 
and  the  labor  movement  is  theoretical. 

It  is,  moreover,  less  possible  for  workers,  unaccus- 
tomed to  initiate  or  direct,  to  hold  their  place  in  po- 
litical life  by  the  side  of  others  who  are  in  the  habit  of 
ruling  or  regulating  the  work  and  the  lives  of  other 
people.  The  latter  inevitably  in  political  affairs  will 
take  the  lead  and  will  have  no  keen  understanding  of 
the  ordinary  working  man,  and  less  sympathy  with 
his  vital  interests  which  are  opposed  to  their  own. 

Specifically,  then,  direct  action  means  the  efforts  of 
labor  unions  to  transfer  power  in  part  or  in  whole 
from  capital  to  labor  without  the  interference  of  the 
political  state. 

While  American  trade  unions  never  use  the  term, 
it  applies,  nevertheless,  to  all  efforts  of  the  trade  union- 
ist in  collective  bargaining,  boycotts,  strikes,  limitation 
of  output,  and  other  trade  regulations  initiated  and 
enforced  by  a  union. 

In  America,  the  term  is  used  by  the  Industrial  Work- 
ers of  the  World  in  their  appeal  to  workers  to  depend 


252  AMERICAN  LABOR  UNIONS 

upon  themselves,  and,  through  their  organizations,  se- 
cure control  of  the  industry  in  which  they  work.  The 
methods  advocated  are  strikes,  sabotage,  and  agitation. 

As  the  Industrial  Workers  expect  direct  action  on 
its  educational  side  to  develop  power  through  oppor- 
tunities for  doing,  it  would  seem  to  follow  that  within 
the  organization  there  would  be  less  delegation  of 
power  and  less  representation  than  in  other  unions. 
It  is  true  that  there  is  less  representation,  but  it  is  also 
true  that  the  plan  of  the  organization  is  the  centraliza- 
tion of  large  powers  in  a  national  executive.  There  is 
at  present  a  movement  on  foot  within  the  organization 
for  decentralization. 

If  direct  action  in  the  hands  of  the  Industrial  Work- 
ers should  fail  as  a  present  strategic  measure,  the  or- 
ganization in  advocating  it  has  advertised  successfully 
and  at  a  propitious  time  that  opportunity  for  initiative 
is  a  more  fundamental  need  of  workers,  whose  days 
are  spent  in  monotonous  toil  and  under  machine  di- 
rection, than  are  slight  increases  in  wages.  The  Indus- 
trial Workers,  in  emphasizing  the  importance  of  direct 
action,  bring  out  the  point  thatjabor  union  action, 
dealing  as  it  does  with  the  direct  and  immediatejnter- 
^  ests  of  the  workers,  calls  for  simpler  forms_oi_gocial 
expression,  forms  of  expression  less  remote  in  their 
functioning  and  results,  than  political  action.  Political 
action  in  comparison,  they  observe,  is  a  more  sophisti- 
cated expression  of  more  complex  relations. 


APPENDIX 

Directory  of  the  International  Unions  of  the  A.  F.  of  L. ;  to- 
gether with  reports  for  1913  on  convention  vote,  showing  the 
comparative  strength  of  the  unions;  the  number  of  strikes  which 
occurred  in  1913 ;  the  settlements  which  were  jnade  fixing  condi- 
tions without  resorting  to  strikes — Distribution  by  states  and 
towns  of  local  unions  of  the  I.  W.  W. 


APPENDIX 

American  Federation  of  Labor 

The  membership  of  the  A.  F.  of  L.  is  2,000,000  (as  reported  at 
convention  in  1913  it  was  1,996,004).  There  are  no  National 
and  International  unions  controlling  22,000  local  unions;  there 
are  5  Departments;  42  State  Branches;  623  City  Central  Unions; 
642  Local  Trade  and  Federal  Labor  Unions. 

Directory  of  American  Federation  of  Labor  National  and  In- 
ternational unions.  Reports  for  1913  on  convention  vote;  num- 
ber of  strikes;  settlements  without  strikes. 


£       «    g'S 

Name                                      Headquarters             g-g  •*  Eu 

>>  £  Sa 

c  w  t!  ° 

o  w  t>5 

Asbestos  Workers,  Inter.  Asso.  w'£ 

of    Heat,    Frost,    Insulators, 
and St.  Louis,  Mo. ...        87        3 

Bakery  and  Confectionery 
Workers'  Inter.  Union Chicago,  111 151     12     120 

Barbers'  International  Union, 
Journeymen    Indianapolis,   Ind.    318      7      53 

Bill  Posters  and  Billers  of 
America,  Inter.  Alliance  of.     New  York,  N.  Y.       14     

Blacksmiths,  Inter.  Brother- 
hood of  Chicago,  111 90      3      14 

Boilermakers  and  Iron  Ship- 
builders of  America,  Broth- 
erhood of  Kansas  City,  Kan.     162    85     ... 

Bookbinders,  Inter.  Brother- 
hood of    Indianapolis,   Ind.      91     

Boot  and  Shoe  Workers' 
Union Boston,   Mass.    . .     343     14     ... 

Brewery  Workmen,  Interna- 
tional Union  of  the  United.     Cincinnati,    O 450    32    262 

Brick.  Tile,  and  Terra  Cotta 
Workers'  Alliance,  Inter....     Chicago,    111 39    17     ... 

Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers,  Inter.  Asso.  of...    Indianapolis,   Ind.     100     

255 


256  APPENDIX 


c 


•J-.x. 


•5  „,        «       C  r< 

Name  Headquarters  £  o      g     E„_, 

c>     is   .sg 

u  «J5 

Broom      and     Whiskmakers                                                          > 
Union,  International  Chicago,  111 7     

Brushmakers'   Inter.  Union...    Brooklyn,  N.  Y. .        2      2      12 

Carpenters  and  Joiners  of 
Am.,  United  Brotherhood  of    Indianapolis,   Ind.  2107    30    125 

Carriage,  Wagon,  and  Auto 
Workers  of  N.  A.,  Interna- 
tional Union  of Buffalo,   N.   Y...       29      5      26 

Cement  Workers,  American 
Brotherhood  of    S.  Francisco,  Cal.      90     

Cigarmakers'  Inter.  Union  of 
America Chicago,  111 402    48      21 

Cloth,  Hat,  and  Cap  Makers 
of  N.  A.,  United New  York,  N.  Y.      38    35     ••• 

Commercial  Telegraphers'  Un- 
ion of  America Chicago,  111 10      1        1 

Compressed  Air  and  Founda- 
tion Workers'  Union  of  the 
United  States  and  Canada..    Brooklyn,  N.  Y..        8     

Coopers'  Inter.  Union  of  N.  A.    Kansas  City,  Kan.      46    21      25 

Cutting,  Die,  and  Cutter  Mak- 
ers, Inter.  Union  of New  York,  N.  Y.        3     

Diamond  Workers'  Protective 
Union  of  America Brooklyn,  N.  Y. .        3     

Electrical     Workers    of    Am., 

Inter.   Brotherhood  of Springfield,  111.  ..     227    28      42 

Elevator  Constructors,  Inter. 
Union  of  Philadelphia,    Pa .       26      2     . . . 

Engineers,  Inter.  Union  of 
Steam   and    Operating Chicago,  111 200    18     ... 

Firemen,  Inter.  Brotherhood 
of  Stationary Omaha,  Neb 160     11     500 

Foundry  Employees,  Interna- 
tional Brotherhood  of St.   Louis,   Mo...        5      1     ... 

Freight  Handlers,  Brother- 
hood of  Railroad Chicago,  111 10     

Fur  Workers'  Union  of  U.  S. 
and  Canada   New  York,  N.  Y 

Garment  Workers  of  America, 
United New  York,  N.  Y.    585      5    522 

Garment  Workers'  Union,  In- 
ternational  (ladies')    New  York,  N.  Y.     788    10        1 

Glass  Bottle  Blowers'  Asso.  of 
the  U.  S.  and  Canada Philadelphia,   Pa.     100      2    ... 


APPENDIX  257 


Name  Headquarters  So     £     g^ 

§        w    52 
o  <u£ 

Glass    Workers'    Inter.    Asso.,  ^ 

Amalgamated New  York,  N.  Y.      13      3        7 

Glass  Workers'  Union,  Am. 
Flint Toledo,    0 91      8     . . . 

Glove  Workers'  Union  of  Am., 
International Chicago,  111 13      6      12 

Granite  Cutters'  Inter.  Asso. 
of  America  Quincy,   Mass.    . .     135    38     ... 

Grinders'  and  Finishers'  Na- 
tional Union,  Pocketknife 
Blade Bridgeport,  Conn.        3     

Hatters  of  N.  A.,  United New  York,  N.  Y.      85      2     ... 

Hod  Carriers'  Building  and 
Common  Laborers'  Union 
of  America,  International...    Albany,  N.  Y....     221     24     ... 

Horseshoers'  of  U.  S.  and 
Canada,  Inter.  Union  of 
Journeymen Cincinnati,  O.  . . .       53      4      20 

Hotel  and  Restaurant  Em- 
ployees' Inter.  Alliance  and 
Bartenders'  Inter.  League  of 
America Cincinnati,  O.  . . .     539    43     ... 

Iron,  Steel,  and  Tin  Workers, 
Amal.  Asso.  of Pittsburg,  Pa.    ...      55      2     ... 

Lace    Operatives    of    America, 

Chartered  Soc.  of  Amal Philadelphia,  Pa..       11      6     ... 

Lathers',  Inter.  Union  of 
Wood,  Wire,  and  Metal Cleveland,  O.   . . .       50     

Laundry  Workers'  Interna- 
tional Union Troy,  N.  Y 26      2      30 

Leather  Workers  on  Horse 
Goods,  United  Brother,  of..    Kansas  City,  Mo.       19     

Lithographers,  Inter.  Protec- 
tive and  Beneficial  Asso.  of 
N.  A.  and  Canada New  York,  N.  Y.      26     

Lithographic  Press  Feeders  of 
U.  S.  and  Canada,  Inter. 
Protective  Asso.  of New  York,  N.  Y.      10     

Longshoremen's   Asso.,  Inter..    Buffalo,  N.  Y 220      7      75 

Machine  Printers  and  Color 
Mixers  of  the  U.  S.,  Nat. 
Asso.  of  Buffalo.  N.  Y 5    35     ... 

Machinists,  Inter.  Asso.  of...    Washington,  D.C.    710    96      90 


258  APPENDIX 


Name  Headquarters  <uo     £      g^ 

0  M       52 

wg 

Maintenance     of     Way     Em-                                                         > 
ployees,  Inter.  Broth,  of Detroit,  Mich.  ...      8o     

Marble  Workers,  Inter.  As- 
sociation of New  York,  N.  Y.      30      4     ... 

Meat  Cutters  and  Butcher 
Workmen  of  N.  A.,  Amal.. .     Syracuse,  N.  Y..       54    12      81 

Metal  Polishers,'  Buffers', 
Platers',  Brass,  and  Silver 
Workers'  Union  of  N.  A...    Cincinnati,  O.  . . .     100    30     100 

Metal  Workers'  Inter.  Alli- 
ance, Amal.  Sheet Kansas  City,  Mo.     169    23     ... 

Mine  Workers  of  America, 
United Indianapolis,   Ind.  3708     

Miners,  Western  Federation 
of Denver,  Colo.  . . .    485    13     ... 

Molders'  Union  of  N.  A., 
International Cincinnati,  O.   ...     500     

Musicians,  American  Federa- 
tion of  St.  Louis,  Mo 546    

Painters,  Decorators,  and  Pa- 
perhangers  of  Am.,  Broth- 
erhood of   Lafayette,  Ind.  ..     709     

Papermakers,  Inter.  Brother- 
hood of   Albany,   N.   Y 40      8      19 

Patternmakers'  League  of  N. 
A Cincinnati,  O.  . . .      65    28     ... 

Pavers,  Rammermen,  Flag- 
layers,  Bridge,  and  Stone 
Curb  Setters,  International 
Union  of  New  York,  N.  Y.      15     

Paving  Cutters'  Union  of  the 
U.  S.  and  Canada Albion,  N.  Y 35      9     ... 

Photo-Engravers'  Union  of  N. 

A.,  International   Philadelphia,    Pa.       44      6     ... 

Piano  and  Organ  Workers' 
Union  of  America,  Inter...     Chicago,  111 10      5     ... 

Plasterers'  Inter.  Asso.  of  U. 
S.  and   Canada,  Operative..    Middletown,  O...     173     ..      69 

Plate  Printers'  Union  of  N. 
A.,  Inter.  Steel  and  Copper.    Washington,  D.C.       13     . .        7 

Plumbers  and  Steam  Fitters 
of  the  U.  S.  and  Canada, 
United  Association  of Chicago,  111 290    


APPENDIX  259 


Name  Headquarters  <uo      ^      g^ 

Postoffice  Clerks,  Nat.  Federa-  •* 

tion  of   Washington,  D.C.      22     

Potters,    Nat.    Brotherhood   of 

Operative East  Liverpool,  O.      65     . .        1 

Powder    and    High    Explosive 

Workers  of  Am.,  United...    Columbus,   Kan..        2     ..        2 
Print    Cutters'   Asso.   of    Am., 

National Jersey  City,  N.  J.        4      4     . . . 

Printing     Pressmen's     Union, 

International Rogersville,  Tenn.     190     . .       66 

Pulp,  Sulphite,  and  Paper  Mill 

Workers  of   the   U.   S.    and 

Canada Ft.  Edward,  N.  Y. 

Quarry  Workers,  Inter.  Union 

of  N.  A Barre,  Vt 

Railroad    Telegraphers,    Order 

of    St.  Louis,  Mo 

Railway    Carmen   of    America, 

Brotherhood   of    Kansas  City,  Mo. 

Railway  Clerks,  Brother,  of.  .    Kansas  City,  Mo. 
Railway    Employees    of    Am., 

Amal.    Asso.   of   Street   and 

Electric Detroit,  Mich.  . . . 

Retail    Clerks,    Inter.    Protec- 
tive Association  Lafayette,  Ind.  .. 

Roofers,    Composition,    Damp, 

and  Waterproof  Workers  of 

the  U.  S.  and  Canada,  Inter. 

Brotherhood  of   Brooklyn,  N.  Y.. 

Sawsmiths'  National  Union...    Indianapolis,    Ind. 

Seamen's  Union  of  Am.,  Inter.    Chicago,   111 

Shingle       Weavers,       Sawmill 

Workers,     and     Woodsmen, 

Inter.   Union  of Seattle,  Wash.   ..       31     . . 

Slate  and  Tile  Roofers'  Union 

of  America,  International...     Cleveland,  O.    . . .         6      3 
Slate  Workers,   Am.    Brother- 
hood of  Penn  Argyle,  Pa.        3     . . 

Spinners'    International   Union    Holyoke,    Mass...       22       1 
Stage   Employees  of  America, 

Inter.  Alliance  of  Theatrical    New  York,  N.  Y.     132      5 
Steel  Plate  Transferrers'  Asso. 

of  America   Washington,  D.C.        1     .. 


31 

6 

6 

40 

5 

12 

250 

59 

280 

2 

50 

50 

457 

21 

76 

150 

1 

... 

12 

5 

4 

1 

160 

. .  • 

26o  APPENDIX 


o  "£ 

C  *J         V         vfr. 

Name  Headquarters  ;u  o      •*      E^ 

o         co      *j  2 

Kg 

Stereotypers'    and    Electrotyp-  ^ 

ers'  Union  of  N.  A.,  Inter..    Boston,  Mass.  ...       45      5      37 

Stonecutters'  Asso.  of  N.  A., 
Journeymen Indianapolis,    Ind.      66      4      12 

Stove  Mounters'  International 
Union Detroit,  Mich.  ...       11     . .       22 

Switchmen's  Union  of  N.  A..     Buffalo,    N.    Y...       96     ..     ... 

Tailors'  Union  of  Am.,  Jour- 
neymen       Bloomington,  111..     120    28      52 

Teamsters,  Chauffeurs,  Stable- 
men, and  Helpers  of  Am., 
Inter.   Brotherhood  of Indianapolis,  Ind.     469    32    247 

Textile  Workers  of   America, 

United Fall  River,  Mass.     162      7     ... 

Tilelayers'  and  Helpers'  Inter. 
Union,  Ceramic,  Mosaic,  and 
Encaustic Pittsburg,   Pa....       27      4      12 

Tip  Printers,  Inter.  Bro.  of...     Newark,  N.  J 2     

Tobacco  Workers'  Inter.  Union    Louisville,  Ky.   . .       36     

Travelers'  Goods  and  Leather 
Novelty  Workers'  Inter. 
Union  of  America Oshkosh,  Wis.    ..         9      4        I 

Tunnel  and  Subway  Construc- 
tors' International  Union...    New  York,  N.  Y.       19    16      10 

Typographical  Union,  Inter...    Indianapolis,  Ind.     564     15     158 

Upholsterers'   Inter.   Union  of 

N.  A L.  I.  City,  N.  Y..       31      3      15 

Weavers'  Amalgamated  Asso., 
Elastic  Goring Brockton,  Mass..         1     

White  Rats  Actors'  Union  of 

America New  York,  N.  Y.     no     

Wire  Weavers'  Protective  As-    Woodhaven,  L.  I., 

sociation,  American  N.  Y 3     

Wood  Carvers'  Asso.  of  N.  A., 
International Roxbury,  Mass  ..103        8 


APPENDIX 


261 


INDUSTRIAL  WORKERS  OF  THE  WORLD 

Distribution  of  Unions  by  States  and  Territories 


State 

Town  or  City 

Local  Union  No. 

Alaska 

Ketchikan 

283 

Juneau 

352 

Arizona 

Lowell 

6sbr2 

Bisbee 

65 

Phoenix 

272 

British  Columbia 

Victoria 

94,  44,  58,  328 

Vancouver 

322,  45,  515 

Prince  Rupert 

326 

Kamloops 

327 

California 

San  Diego 

13 

Fresno 

66 

Sacramento 

71,  489 

Stockton 

73 

San  Francisco 

173,  9 

Oakland 

174 

Colfax 

334 

Point  Richmond 

355 

Redlands 

419 

Brawley 

439 

Coalinga 

450 

Taft 

453 

Vallejo 

485 

San  Pedro 

245 

Eureka 

431 

Canada 

Manitoba 

Winnipeg 

47 

Alberta 

Calgary 

79 

Edmonton 

82 

Colorado 

Denver 

26,  133 

Connecticut 

New  Britain 

29 

Norwich 

208 

Moosup 

303 

Shelton 

528 

Norwalk 

535 

Florida 


Tampa,  Ybor  City       102 


262 

APPENDIX 

State 

Town  or  City 

Local  Union  No. 

Illinois 

Chicago 

3;  3br2;  21;  8sbr2,  3, 
5;    104;    341;    465; 
Soobri,  2;  526;   196 

Peoria 

27 

Joliet 

142 

Staunton 

242 

Caseyville 

244 

Rockford 

480 

Indiana 

Shelbyville 

483 

Indianapolis 

52 

Gary 

294 

Iowa 

Valley  Junction 

577 

Louisiana 

Quadrate 

208 

Leesville 

210 

Merryville 

218 

Oakdale 

219 

Tioga 

228 

Flora 

235 

Pollack 

254 

Provencal 

259 

Osbourn 

274 

Hammons 

288 

Singer 

289 

West  Lake 

365 

De   Ridder 

386 

Zwolle 

387 

Mystic 

388 

De  Quincy 

390 

Kinder 

393 

Starks 

394 

Oberlin 

395 

Rosepine 

396 

Derry 

402 

Phillips-Bluff 

412 

New  Orleans 

7 

Massachusetts 

Boston 

190,    34br2,    115,    185, 

"      Brookline 

574 

Lawrence 

20 

New  Bedfard 

157 

Ware 

162 

Webster 

166 

Fitchburg 

199 

Fall  River 

204 

Holyoke 

205 

Lowell 

436 

Montello 

31 

APPENDIX 

263 

State 

Town  or  City 

Local  Uuion  No. 

Massachusetts 

Quincy 

34 

(continued) 

Milford 

55 

Charlestown 

96 

Haverhill 

169 

Gardner 

548 

East  Boston 

557 

Roxbury 

560 

Maryland 

Baltimore 

192 

Michigan 

Detroit 

i6bn,  2,  3,  62 

Grand  Rapids 

202 

Cadillac 

407 

Minneosta 

Minneapolis 

221,  263 

Crosby 

314 

Duluth 

68,  136 

Missouri 

Kansas   City 

61 

St.  Louis 

84,  84br2,  I39br2 

Montana 

Missoula 

40 

Great  Falls 

57i 

Nebraska 

Omaha 

384 

New  Jersey 

Jersey  City 

376,  119 

Newark 

90 

Lodi 

377 

Hoboken 

3/8 

New  Bergen 

38i 

Paterson 

152 

West  Hoboken 

514 

Hackensack 

5i6 

New  York 

New  York 

546,    556br2,    558,    i, 
189,    9,    95br2,    95, 
95br3,  95br4,  iosbri, 
br2,  123,  179,  I79br2, 
375 

Cohoes 

188 

Rochester 

191 

Little  Falls 

207 

Middle  Village, 

L.  I. 

527 

Buffalo 

5 

Brooklyn 

121,    122,   220,   374 

Schenectady 

8l 

264 

APPENDIX 

State 

Town  or  City 

Local  Union  No. 

New  Hampshire 

Manchester 

163 

North  Carolina 

Salem-Winston 

5/0 

Ohio 

Cleveland 

33,  33br3 

Elyria 

49 

Toledo 

86 

Rhodesdale 

236 

Dillonvale 

240 

Akron 

470 

Dayton 

573 

Oregon 

Eugene 

88 

Portland 

141,  93 

Marshfield 

435 

Pennyslvania 

Allentown 

525 

«                   1 

Philadelphia 

57,    S7br2,    n,    nbr3, 
12s,    126,    137.    547, 
553,  425,  3 

Belle  Vernon 

582 

Wilkinsburg 

30 

McKeesport 

32 

Old  Forge 

97,  118,  125,  511 

Scranton 

98 

Pittsburg 

101,  215 

Kittanning 

2i5br2 

Jessup 

238 

New  Castle 

297 

Hazleton 

5i8 

Rhode  Island 

Woonsocket 

99,   513 

Providence 

151 

Olneyville 

530 

South  Carolina 

Grenville 

512 

Texas 

Votaw 

398 

El  Paso 

572 

Utah 

Salt  Lake  City 

69 

Helper 

237 

Price 

256 

Virginia 

Newport  News 

5 

Norfolk 

4 

Washington 

Sedro  Wooley 

3i8 

Bellingham 

337 

APPENDIX 

265 

State 

Town  or  City 

Local  Union  No. 

Washington 
(continued) 

Price 

Seattle 

256 

131,  178,   i;8br2,  382, 

Tacoma 
Everett 
Spokane 
Port  Angeles 
Ballard 

252,  432 
38o,  338 
248 

315 
316 

317 

Wisconsin 

Superior 

10 

West  Virginia 

Clarksburg 
Fairmont 

575 
576 

THE  REFERENCE  NOTES  OF  CITATIONS 

Chapter  I 
I — Walter   Weyl,   "  The    New    Democracy." 

Chapter  II 

I — A.  F.  of  L.  Constitution,  Preamble  in  Report  of   Conven- 
tion, 1913. 
2 — "  The   Leather  Worker,"   April,   1913. 
3 — A.  F.  of  L.,  op.  cit.,  Art.  X,  Sec.  1. 

Chapter  III 

I — B.   R.  T.   "  Souvenir "   Eleventh   Biennial   Convention. 

2 — Arbitration  Board  Report,  "  In  the  matter  of  the  con- 
troversy between  the  B.  of  L.  E.  and  the  Eastern 
Railroads,"  1912,  pp.  1 19-120. 

3 — U.  S.  Bureau  of  Labor.     Bulletin  No.  98,  Jan.,  1912,  pp.  5-6. 

4 — John    R.    Commons.      "  Labor    Adminstration,"    p.    125. 

5— B.  L.  E.  &  L.  F.  &  E.  "Joint  Agreement,"  1913,  p.  7. 

6 — Eastern  Association  of  General  Committees  of  O.  R.  C. 
&  B.  R.  T.   Report,  1913.  P-   13- 

Chapter  IV 

i_Vincent  St.  John,  "  History  of  the  I.  W.  W.,"  p.  28. 

2 — Ibid.,  pp.  8-9. 

3 — Vincent   St.    John,    "  Industrial   Unionism,"    p.    6. 

4 — Ibid.,  p.  5. 

5 — Daniel   De  Leon,   Report  of   Convention,   1906,   pp.   330-331. 

6— Vincent  St.  John,  "  History  of  the  I.  W.  W.,"  p.  25. 

Chapter  VI 

1 — Samuel    Gompers,    "  Woman's    Work "    in    the    "  American 
Federationist,"   Aug.,   1913,   pp.   625-627. 
266 


REFERENCE  NOTES  267 

Chapter  VII 

1 — A.  F.  of  L.   Report  of  Convention,   1912,  pp.   114-115. 

2 — A.  F.  of  L.  Building  Trades  Department.     Report  of  Con- 
vention,   1912,   p.   63. 

3 — A.  F.   of   L.,   Metal  Trades   Department.     Report   of   Con- 
vention,  1913,  p.   16. 

4 — Ibid.,  p.  16. 

5 — Ibid.,  p.   12. 

6 — Ibid.,  p.  30. 

7 — A.    F.    of    L.,    Railway    Employees'    Department,    Constitu- 
tion,  p.  3. 

8— Letter   to   Helen   Marot. 

9 — Herman   Schluter,   "  The   Brewing   Industry,"   p.   219. 
10 — Ibid.,  p.  227. 
11 — Ibid.,    p.    228. 

Chapter  VIII 

1 — E.    R.    A.    Seligman,    "  The    Crisis    in    Colorado,"    in    the 
"  Annalist,"  4th  May,   1914. 


Chapter  X 

1 — Court    of    Appeals    Decision,    District    of    Columbia,    nth 

March,   1909. 
2 — A.  F.  of  L.  "  Buck  Stove  and  Range  Company.     Injunction 

suits,"    pph.,  pp.    19-20. 
3 — Frank  L.    Mulholland,   in  A.   F.   of   L.   Convention   Report, 

1912,   pp.   277-279. 
4 — Supreme  Court  of  Montana,  96,  Pacific  Reporter,  127. 

Chapter  XI 

1 — Arbitration  Board  Report,  "  In  the  matter  of  the  contro- 
versy between  the  B.  of  L.  E.  and  the  Eastern  Rail- 
roads,"  1912,  pp.  107-108. 

2 — Ibid.    (Mr.    Morrisy),   pp.    121-122. 

3 — Andrew  Furuseth  in  "  Locomotive  Firemen's  Magazine," 
Aug.,   1913,  p.  257. 

4 — Samuel  Gompers,  "  American  Federationist,"  April,  1914, 
pp.   316-317- 

Chapter  XII 

I — Samuel    Gompers,    "  American    Federationist,"    April,    1914, 

p.  316. 
2 — A.  F.  of  L.     Report  of  Convention,   1913,  p.  63. 


268  REFERENCE  NOTES 

3 — Samuel    Gompers,    "  News   Letter,"    ioth   Jan.,    1914. 

4 — A.  F.   of   L.,  Legislative   Committee,  Report   in  "  American 

Federationist,"    April,    1913,   pp.   294-296. 
S — "  American  Federationist,"  Sept.,  1913. 


Chapter  XIII 

1 — Magistrate  Campbell  in  Chief  Magistrates  Court,  see  "  New 
York  Times,"  8th  March,  1914. 


Chapter  XIV 

1 — A.    F.   of   L.     Report  of   Convention,   1912,   p.    144. 

2 — "  Typographical    Journal,"    Jan.,    1914,    pp.    3-4. 

3 — "  Amalgamated    Journal    of    the    A.    of    I.    S.    T.    W.,    9th 

Jan.,   1913. 
4 — Anton  Johannsen,  see  "  The  Survey,"  1st  Feb.,  1913,  p.  615. 


Chapter  XV 

1 — "The    Globe,"    New    York,    9th    July,    1913. 

2 — John  Walker,  in   "  Locomotive   Firemen's   Magazine,"   Oct., 

1913,  P-  549- 
3 — A.  F.  of  L.  Convention  Report,  1912,  p.  149. 


Chapter  XVI 

1 — Arturo  Giovannitti   in   Emile  Pouget,"  Sabotage,"  pp.  13-14. 
2 — James   Warbasse,    "  Sabotage "   pamphlet   reprinted   and   re- 
vised from  "  The  Call,"  New  York. 
3 — Arturo   Giovannitti,  op.   cit,  p.   15. 
4 — Ibid.,  p.   15. 

5 — "Jersey  Justice,"  pph.,  p.   t. 
6 — Arturo    Giovannitti,   op.   cit.,   pp.   28-29. 

Chapter  XVIII 

1 — Frederick   W.   Taylor,   in   "  Dartmouth    College   Conference 

on   Scientific   Management,"  p.  32. 
2— Ibid.,    pp.   32-35. 
3 — Tbid.,   p.   21. 

4 — H.   E.  Slayton   in  op.  cit.,  p.  222. 
5 — H.   L.    Gant,   in  op.   cit.,   p.   222. 
6 — F.  W.  Taylor,  op.  cit.,  p.  31. 
7 — "  American  Medicine,"  April,  1913,  p.  199. 


REFERENCE  NOTES  269 


Chapter  XIX 

1 — A.  F.  of  L.  Convention  Report,   1912,  p.  146. 
2— Ibid.,  p.  33. 

3 — Washington    State    Federation    of    Labor,    Convention    Re- 
port,  1913,  P-  23. 


INDEX 


Agreements.  See  Wage  agree- 
ments. 

Amalgamation,  M«tal  trades, 
89,  92,  95;  Miners'  Unions, 
98;  see  also  Industrial  or 
trade  unionism,  jurisdiction. 

American  Federation  of  Labor, 
Chap.  II ;  autonomy  of  in- 
ternationals, 16-20,  98-99; 
amalgamation,  89,  92,  95,  98; 
boycott,  Chap.  X ;  class 
action,  13-14,  18-19  (see  also 
Industrial  or  trade  unionism, 
Sympathetic  action)  ;  conven- 
tions, 16 ;  executive  council, 
24;  federation,  15;  "Federa- 
tion of  federations,"  95-97; 
federal  unions,  21 ;  I.  W.  W, 
criticism  of,  57-58;  industrial 
unionism,  Chap.  V ;  inter- 
national unions,  16-20  (see 
also  Autonomy,  Jurisdic- 
tion) ;  jurisdiction,  16-17,  84- 
87,  95;  101-105;  label,  Chap. 
IX,  23 ;  legislation,  Chap. 
XII;  limitation  of  output, 
Chap.  XVII ;  local  unions, 
16,  20-21 ;  partnership  rela- 
tions, 11-12,  18-19;  political 
action.  Chap.  XIX ;  and 
Socialism,  13,  243-244;  state 
branches,  25-26;  statistics  of 
unions,  15-16;  tax,  16;  trade 
departments,  22,  85-98;  union 
shop,  Chap.  VIII ;  violence, 
191-193 ;  wage  agreements, 
27,  255-266 ;  women's  organi- 
zation, 65-67,  69,  76-77. 

Apprenticeship  regulations,  225- 
228. 

Arbitration,  Chap.  XI;  Cana- 
dian Disputes  Act,  155-157; 
Erdman    Act,    37,    149-150; 


Locomotive  engineers  award, 
150-152;  New  Zealand  and 
Australia,  157-159;  Newlands 
Act,  154-155;  Railroad  broth- 
erhoods, 36-38;  State  boards 
of,  178. 

Aristocracy  of  labor,  115-116; 
high  dues,  54 ;   limited,   228. 

Autonomy,  A.  F.  of  L.  inter- 
nationals, 16-20;  of  electrical 
workers,  100-101 ;  printing 
trades,  98-99;  building  trades, 
86-89;  metal  trades,  89-95; 
I.  W.  W.,  opposition  to,  58- 
59,  61-62. 

Blacklist,  employers'  boycott, 
136. 

Boot  and  Shoe  Workers,  op- 
position to  class  action,  18; 
use  of  label,  131. 

Boycott,  Chap.  X ;  A.  F.  of  L. 
committee  on,  138-140;  basis 
for  its  use,  136;  Buck  Stove 
and  Range  Co.,  137;  conspir- 
acy decisions,  145;  bill  op- 
posing conspiracy  interpreta- 
tion, 168-169;  Danbury  Hat- 
ters, 140-144;  Halloway  opin- 
ion, 145-146;  Montana  deci- 
sion, 145 ;  secondary  boycott, 
147 ;  Van  Orsdel  opinion, 
137-138. 

Brewery  Workers,  Socialist 
sentiment,  13 ;  industrial 
unionism  of,  101-106;  juris- 
diction of,  102-105. 

Bricklayers'  union,  226. 

Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers,  union  shop,  124; 
dynamite  conspiracy,  184- 
186,  190-197. 


271 


272 


INDEX 


Buck   Stove    and   Range    Co., 

137-138,  165. 
Building    Trades    Department 

(A.  F.  of  L.),  22,  85-89. 

Canadian    Disputes    Act,    155- 

157- 
Chicago  Federation  of  Labor, 

14,  20. 

Cigar  Makers'  Union,  in  Colo- 
rado miners'  strike,  118; 
women  packers,  66. 

Citizen   alliances,  214. 

Class  action  (see  Sympathetic 
action),  A.  F.  of  L.,  13-14; 
industrial  unionism  may 
mean,  no;  Boot  and  Shoe 
Workers'  opposition  to,  18; 
I.  W.  W.  position,  49-58, 
109-110;  Railroad  brother- 
hood position,  29-31,  45. 

Closed  shop.     See  Union  shop. 

Compulsory  arbitration.  See 
Arbitration. 

Conductors.  See  Order  of 
Railroad  Conductors. 

Contracts.  See  Wage  agree- 
ments. 

Court  injunctions,  federal  bill 
opposing,  168;  orders  of  re- 
straint, 170;  state  legislation, 
179;  Montana  federation, 
145 ;  A.  F.  of  L.  officers,  167. 

Courts,  The,  labor's  conflict 
with,  Chap.  XIII;  dynamite 
case,  184-186;  prejudice  of 
judges,  183-184,  186;  free 
speech,  187;  decisions  in  boy- 
cott cases,  137-147;  opposi- 
tion to  interpretation  of 
trusts,  142-144,  165-170;  Pat- 
erson   strike.   204. 

Direct  action,  Chap.  XX,  56. 

Electrical  Workers,  opposition 

to  industrial  action,  100. 
Erdman    Act,   37-38;    149-150. 

Federation,  A.  F.  of  L.,  federal 
plan  of  organization,   15-26; 


A.  F.  of  L.  railroad  em- 
ployees, 95-97 ;  Railroad 
brotherhoods,  development 
of,  42-45- 
Firemen.  See  Railroad  broth- 
erhoods. 

Guards.    See  Strikebreakers. 
Gunmen.    See  Strikebreakers. 

Hatters'  union.  See  United 
hatters. 

Hotel  and  Restaurant  Em- 
ployees' union,  83. 

Industrial  or  trade  unionism, 
Chap.  VI;  in  A.  F.  of  L., 
82-85  ;  Brewery  workers,  102- 
105;  as  class  action,  no;  in 
I.  W.  W.,  48-50,  53-54,  108- 
109;  Metal  workers,  90- 
95;  Miners',  98,  101-102; 
Light,  heat,  and  power  coun- 
cil, 99-100;  and  Sympathetic 
action,  112-119. 

Industrial  Workers  of  the 
World,  Chap.  IV;  attitude 
towards  A.  F.  of  L,  57-58; 
autonomy  opposition,  58-59, 
61-62 ;  class  action,  50-58,  108- 
109;  centralization,  61 ;  direct 
or  political  action,  56, 251-252  ; 
industrialism  of,  48-50,  53- 
54,  58-63,  108-109;  Law- 
rence strike,  188-189,  205-206; 
mass  picketing,  205  ;  member- 
ship, 63  ;  Paterson  strike,  203- 
204;  and  Socialism,  51;  and 
Syndicalism,  51-52;  short 
strike,  55;  sabotage,  215-216, 
219-221 ;  unskilled  workers, 
56,  63;  violence,  188-190,  204; 
and  women's  organization, 
68,  70,  74- 

Injunctions.  See  Court  injunc- 
tions. 

Insurance,  Railroad  brother- 
hoods, 33-35- 

Journeymen  Tailors,  Socialist 
sentiment,  13. 


INDEX 


273 


Jurisdiction,  in  A.  F.  of  L.,  16- 
17,  84-85,  101,  112-113;  build- 
ing trades,  86-87;  Brewery 
Workers,  102-106;  Metal 
trades,  94-95  ;  Miners,  102. 

Label,  The,  Chap.  IX ;  defini- 
tion of,  129-130;  where  sue-, 
cessful,  131-132;  demand  a 
duty,  132;  difficulties  of,  133; 
an  ethical  proposition,  134 ; 
United  Garment  Workers, 
131 ;  Cigar  Makers,  131 ; 
Boot  and  Shoe,  131 ;  Metal 
Polishers,  133;  Musicians, 
133. 

Ladies'  Garment  Workers,  75. 

Lawrence  strike,    188-189,   205. 

Leather  Workers'  Union,  atti- 
tude towards  class  action,  18. 

Legislation,  Labor,  Chap.  XII ; 
attitude  towards,  162 ;  A.  F. 
of  L.  indorsement  of,  171- 
179;  attitude  towards  Aus- 
tralasian, 163 ;  minimum 
wage,  164,  178;  opposition  to 
interpretation  of  trusts,  142- 
144,  165-170;  immigration, 
170;  workmen's  compensa- 
tion, 175;  employers'  liability, 
175;  on  health,  176;  on 
safety,  170,  176;  convict  la- 
bor, 176;  "loan  shark,"  177; 
on  mining,  177 ;  on  hours, 
177;  on  women,  164,  177, 
178;  child  labor,  178;  wage 
payments,  178;  employment 
bureaus,  178;  trades  disputes, 
178;  arbitration  boards,  178; 
labor  bureaus,  179;  anti-in- 
junction, 179;  direct  legisla- 
tion,   179. 

Light,  Heat  and  Power  Coun- 
cil of   California,  99-100. 

Limitation  of  output,  Chap. 
XVII;  by  capital,  222-223; 
Textile  Workers'  experience, 
223-225 ;  regulation  of  ap- 
prentices, 225-228;  Brick- 
layers',  226;    Typographical, 


227;  I.  W.  W.  attitude  to- 
wards, 228. 

Local  trades  councils,  of  metal 
trades,  92,  93;  of  building 
trades,  86. 

Locomotive  Engineers.  See 
Railroad  brotherhoods. 

Locomotive  firemen  and  en- 
ginemen.  See  Railroad  broth- 
erhoods. 

Longshoremen's  Union,  83. 

Machinists'    Union,    Socialist 

sentiment,     13 ;     sympathetic 

action,  95. 
McNamara  brothers,  188,   190- 

198. 
Metal    Polishers'    Union,    label 

position,      133;      sympathetic 

action,  92. 
Metal  trades  councils,  92-94. 
Metal    trades    department,    22, 

90-95. 
Militia    in    strikes,    201,    203; 

Lawrence    strike,    189,    205 ; 

Calumet    strike,    209-210;    in 

Colorado,   212-213. 
Minimum  wage,  164,  178. 
Mining  department,  23,  97-08. 
Molders'  Union,  on  union  shop, 

123 ;   failure  in  strike,  93-94. 
Montana  Federation  of  Labor, 

145. 
Musicians'  Union,  use  of  label, 

133. 

National  Erectors'  Association, 
185-186,  191,  194-195.  19". 

National  Manufacturers'  Asso- 
ciation, 137,  191. 

Newlands  amendment,  154-155. 

Open  shop.    See  Union  shop. 
Order  of  Railway  Conductors. 
See  Railroad  brotherhoods. 

Partnership  relations,  11,  18, 
134;  union  shop,  120;  Rail- 
road brotherhoods'  identity 
of   interests,  31-32;   boycott, 


274 


INDEX 


136;  see  also  Wage  agree- 
ments ;  in  opposition  to,  see 
Class  action,  Sympathetic  ac- 
tion. 

Paterson  Silk  Workers'  strike, 
203-204. 

Philanthropy,  Chap.  I. 

Picketing,  Chap.  XV ;  the  right 
of,  200;  as  "  disturbance,"  201- 
203 ;  mass,  205 ;  police  and 
military  interference,  198- 
201,  203-206,  209-210,  212;  in 
Paterson  strike,  203-204;  in 
Lawrence  strike,  188-189, 
205 ;  in  New  York,  206 ;  atti- 
tude of  Railroad  brother- 
hoods, 46. 

Police  officers  in  strikes,  201, 
203 ;  arbitrary  arrests  in  Pat- 
erson, 204;  in  clothing 
trades,  206. 

Political  action,  Chap.  XIX ; 
attitude  of  I.  W.  W.,  56; 
A.  F.  of  L.  and  the  S.  P., 
243-244,  246;  A.  F.  of  L.  in 
practical  politics,  245-246; 
Washington  State  Federa- 
tion, 247;  see  also  Direct  ac- 
tion. 

Preferential  shop,  128. 

Printing  Pressmen,  strike,  14, 
98. 

Railroad  brotherhoods,  Chap. 
Ill;  opposition  to  class  ac- 
tion, 29-32;  conservatism  of, 
30-32,  35 ;  insurance  feature, 
33-35 ;  "  protective  policy," 
34-38;  territorial  divisions, 
39-40 ;  federation,  42-45 ; 
standardization,  40-41 ;  arbi- 
tration, 36-38,  149-155;  Erd- 
man  Act,  37-38;  Newlands' 
Act,  155;  picketing,  46; 
strikes,  35,  36,  44-45. 

Railroad  employees'  depart- 
ment, 22,  95-97. 

Railway  Trainmen.  Sec  Rail- 
road brotherhoods. 


Sabotage,  Chap.  XVI ;  defini- 
tion, 215-217;  I.  W.  W.  ad- 
vocacy,   219. 

San  Francisco  Labor  Council, 
20. 

Scab,  The,  121 ;  official  scab- 
bing, 100. 

Scientific  management,  Chap. 
XVIII;  A.  F.  of  L.  and  I. 
W.  W.  attitude,  231 ;  "four. 
principles  of,"  232-233 ;  a 
workman's  capital,  234;  ini- 
tiative, 238-239 ;  wasted  effort, 
239-240;  increase  in  produc- 
tion, 240-241. 

Sherman  Anti-trust  law,  its  ap- 
plication to  unions,  165-168; 
in  Hatters'  case,  140-144; 
proposed  revision,  168-169. 

Social  reform.  See  Philan- 
thropy. 

Socialism,  in  A.  F.  of  L.,  13, 
243-244,  246;  relation  of  I. 
W.  W.  to,  51;  in  Miners' 
Unions,  109. 

Strikebreakers,  professional,  in 
Calumet  strike,  209-210;  in 
Colorado  strike,  212-213 ;  as 
thugs,  206 ;  as  private  guards, 
203 ;  importation  of,  201 ; 
agents  of  employers,  207; 
anarchy  of  guards,  212 ;  as 
militiamen,    189,    212-213. 

Sympathetic  action,  Chap.  VII; 
and  amalgamation,  114; 
building  trades,  88;  coal 
miners'  experience,  114-115; 
Colorado  strike,  118-119;  and 
industrialism,  111-112,  114- 
115;  I.  W.  W.  purpose,  53- 
55 ;  Light,  Heat,  and  Power, 
Council,  99-100;  Metal 
trades,  89,  92-95,  117;  print- 
ing trades  failure,  98-99 ;  rail- 
road employees,  95 ;  see  also 
class  action  ;  for  opposition  to, 
see  Autonomy ;  Aristocracy 
of  labor ;  Wage  agreements ; 
Railroad  brotherhoods,  44-45. 

Syndicalism,  51-52. 


INDEX 


275 


Trade  agreements.  See  Wage 
agreements. 

Trade  unionism.  See  Indus- 
trialism or  Trade  unionism. 

Trainmen.  See  Railroad  broth- 
erhoods. 

Trusts.  See  Sherman  Anti- 
trust law. 

Typographical  Union,  attitude 
towards  class  action,  14;  in 
Colorado  strike,  118;  in 
Pressmen's  strike,  98;  union 
shop,   123. 

Union  membership,  preface  iii. 

Union  recognition,  Chap.  VIII ; 
definition  of,  120;  Miners' 
demand  in  Colorado  for,  124- 
127. 

Union  shop,  Chap.  VIII ;  defi- 
nition of,  120;  the  scab,  121; 
attitude  of  Railroad  brother- 
hoods, 122;  attitude  of  I.  W. 
W.,  122;  demand  for,  varies 
in  A.  F.  of  L.,  123. 

United  Hatters ;  boycott  case, 
140-144. 

United  Mine  Workers,  So- 
cialist sentiment  in,  13;  as 
an  industrial  union,  101-102, 
106;  jurisdiction,  102;  Colo- 
rado strike,  210-213;  union 
recognition,  124-127 ;  sym- 
pathetic strike  experience, 
114,  118;  indicted  under  trust 
law,  165-166;  West  Virginia 
strike,  207,  210,  212. 

Unskilled  labor,  I.  W.  W.  con- 
cerned with,  56,  63;  lack  of 
sympathy  between  skilled 
and,  1 15-118;  position  of 
craftsmen  weakened,  no; 
women  as,  68;  and  perma- 
nent unions,  69-70. 

Violence,  Chaps.  XIV,  XV; 
relation  of  I.  W.  W.  to,  188- 
190;  McNamara  brothers, 
188,  190-191,  193,  195-198; 
Bridge  and  Structural  Iron 
Workers,        190-197;        Na- 


tional Erectors'  Associa- 
tion, 191,  194-195,  197;  Na- 
tional Manufacturers'  Asso- 
ciation, 191 ;  attitude  of  A.  F. 
of  L.  towards,  191-193;  of 
capital,  189,  191,  193-194, 
198;  police  and  militia,  189- 
190,  198-199,  201,  203-206, 
209-210,  212-213;  Paterson 
strike,  203-204 ;  Lawrence 
strike,  189,  205;  West  Vir- 
ginia strike,  207,  210,  212; 
Calumet  strike,  207-210; 
Colorado  strike,  210-214. 

Wage  agreements,  A.  F.  of  L. 
statistics  of,  27,  255-266;  A. 
F.  of  L.  attitude  towards,  14, 
88-89,  93-94,  98-99,  107-108; 
Western  Federation,  change 
of  policy,  109;  and  Brother- 
hoods, 38-42;  and  industrial- 
ism, 88,  iio-iii  ;  conflict  with 
sympathetic  action,  88,  113- 
114;  label  agreements,  130- 
131 ;  see  Partnership  rela- 
tions. 

Washington  State  Federation 
247. 

Welfare  work,  attitude  of  labor 
towards.     See   Philanthropy. 

Western  Federation  of  Miners, 
Socialist  sentiment,  13;  in- 
dustrialism, 101-102,  106; 
change  in  policy,  109;  Calu- 
met  strike,   207-210. 

Women,  Organization  of. 
Chap.  V;  question  of  dis- 
crimination, 65-67;  relation 
of  women  as  unskilled  work- 
ers to,  68-70;  influence  of 
domestic  attitude,  71-73: 
women  as  strikers,  74 ;  I.  W. 
W.  attitude  towards,  68,  70, 
74;  A.  F.  of  L.  attitude  to- 
wards, 65-67,  69,  77. 

Women's  Trade  Union  League, 
75.  /6. 

Yellowstone  Trade  and  Labor 
Assembly,  145. 


NEW  BOOKS  ON  THE  LIVING  ISSUES  BY  LIVING 
MEN  AND  WOMEN 

The  Home  University  Library 

Cloth  Bound  50c  per  volume  net ;  by  mail  56c. 
Points  about   THE  HOME   UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

Every  volume  is  absolutely  new,  and  specially  written  for 
the  Library.     There  are  no  reprints. 

Every  volume  is  sold  separately.  _  Each  has  illustrations 
where  needed,  and  contains  a  Bibliography  as  an  aid  to 
further  study. 

Every  volume  is  written  by  a  recognized  authority  on  its 
subject,  and  the  Library  is  published  under  the  direction  of 
four  eminent  Anglo-Saxon  scholars  —  Gilbert  Murray,  of 
Oxford;  H.  A.  L.  Fisher,  of  Oxford;  J.  Arthur  Thomson, 
of  Aberdeen;  and  Prof.  W.  T.  Brewster,  cf  Columbia. 

Every  subject  is  of  living  and  permanent  interest.  Thes^e 
books  tell  whatever  is  most  important  and  interesting  about 
their  subjects. 

Each  volume  is  complete  and  independent ;  but  the  series 
has  been  carefully  planned  as  a  whole  to  form  a  compre- 
hensive library  of  modern  knowledge  covering  the  chief  sub- 
jects in  History  and  Geography,  Literature  and  Art,  Science, 
Social  Science,  Philosophy,  and  Religion.  An  order  for  any 
volume  will  insure  receiving  announcements  of  future  issues. 

SOME  COMMENTS  ON  THE  SERIES  AS  A   WHOLE: 

"Excellent." — The   Outlook.      "Exceedingly  worth  while." — The  Nation. 

"The    excellence   of   these   hooks." — The   Dial. 

"So   large   a   proportion   with   marked   individuality." — New    York   Sun. 

VOLUMES  ON  SOCIAL  SCIENCE  NOW  READY 

The  Newspaper  The  School 

By  G.  B.  Dibblee.  By  J.  J.   Findlay. 

Liberalism  The  Stock  Exchange 

By  L    r.  Hobhouse.  By  F>  w.  hirst. 

ibe     Elements     of    Political  D     ,. 

Economy  ^1^^  . 

ByS.  J    Chapman.  By  C.  P.  Ilbkrt. 

The  Socialist  Movement  Tne  Erolution  of  Industry 

By  J.  R.  Macdonald.  By  D.  H.  Macgregor. 

The  Science  of  Wealth  Elements  of  English  Law 

By  J.  A.  Hobson.  By  W.  M.  Geldart. 

HENRY     HOLT     AND     COMPANY 

34  West  33d  Street  (ih'13)  NEW  YORK 


BOOKS    ON    SOCIAL    SCIENCE 

SOCIALISM  AND  DEMOCRACY  IN  EUROPE 

By  Samuel  P.  Orth.  With  bibliography  and  "Programs" 
of  the  various   Socialist  parties.    $1.50  net. 

Traces  briefly  the  growth  of  the  Socialist  movement  in 
France,  Belgium,  Germany,  England,  and  attempts  to  determine 
the  relation  of  economic  and  political  Socialism  to  Democracy, 

MARXISM  VERSUS  SOCIALISM 

By  V.  G.  Simkhovitch,  Professor  of  Political  Science,  Col- 
umbia University.    $1.50  net. 

A  thorough  and  intimate  account  of  all  the  intricate  theories, 
problems  and  difficulties  of  modern  Socialism. 

Professor  Simkhovitch  shows  us  that  the  economic  tendencies 
of  to-day  are  quite  different  from  what  Marx  expected  them  to 
be  and  that  Socialism  from  the  standpoint  of  Marx's  own 
theory  is  quite  impossible. 

WHY  WOMEN  ARE  SO 

By  Mary  Roberts  Coolidge.    $1.50  net. 

"A  fearless  discussion  of  the  modern  woman,  her  inheritance,  her 
present  and  her  more  promising  future.  The  eighteenth  and  nineteenth 
century  woman  is  keenly  analyzed  and  compared  with  the  highest  type 
of  woman  to-day." — A.  L.  A.  Booklist. 

A  MONTESSORI  MOTHER 

By  Dorothy  Canfield  Fisher.  With  Illustrations.  $1.25  net. 

A  simple  untechnical  account  of  the  apparatus,  the  method 
of  its  application,  and  a  clear  statement  of  the  principles  un- 
derlying its  use. 

"Mrs.  Fisher's  book  is  the  best  we  have  seen  on  the  subject." — In- 
dependent. 

THE  SOCIALIST  MOVEMENT  (Home  University  Library) 

By  J.  Ramsay  Macdonald,  Chairman  of  the  British  Labor 
Tarty.    50  cents  net. 

Traces  the  development  of  Socialistic  theory,  practice,  and 
party  organization ;  with  a  summary  of  the  progress  of  Socialist 
parties  to  date  in  the  leading  nations. 

"Not  only  the  latest  authoritative  exposition  of  Socialism,  it  is  also 
:he  most  moderate,  restrained  and  winning  presentation  of  the  subject 
now  before  the  public." — San  Francisco  Argonaut. 


HENRY      HOLT      and      COMPANY 
PUBLISHERS  (v*13)  NEW  YORK 


Hmerican  public  problems  Series 

Edited  by  Ralph  Curtis  Ringwalt 

Chinese  Immigration 

By  Mary  Roberts  Coolidge,  Formerly  Associate  Professor 
of  Sociology  in  Stanford  University.  531  pp.,  $1.75  net;  by 
"nail,  $1.90.     {Just  zsstied.) 

Presents  the  most  comprehensive  record  of  the  Chinaman  In 
the  United  States  that  has  yet  been  attempted. 

"Scholarly.  Covers  every  important  phase,  economic,  social,  and 
political,  of  the  Chinese  question  in  America  down  to  the  San  Francisco 
fire  in  1906." — Ne-w  York  Sun. 

"Statesmanlike.    Of  intense  interest." — Hartford  Courant. 

"A  remarkably  thorough  historical  study.  Timely  and  useful.  En- 
hanced by  the  abundant  array  of  documentary  facts  and  evidence." — 
Chicago  Record-Herald. 

Immigration:  And   Its   Effects   Upon   the  United 
States 

By  Prescott  F.  Hall,  A.B.,  LL.B,  Secretary  of  the  Immi- 
gration Restriction  League.   393  pp.   $1.50  net;  by  mail,  $1.65. 

"  Should  prove  interesting  to  everyone.  Very  readable,  forceful  and 
convincing.  Mr.  Hall  considers  every  possible  phase  of  this  great 
question  and  does  it  in  a  masterly  way  that  shows  not  only  that  he 
thoroughly  understands  it,  but  that  he  is  deeply  interested  in  it  and  has 
studied  everything  bearing  upon  it." — Boston  Transcript- 

"A  readable  work  containing  a  vast  amount  of  valuable  information. 
Especially  to  be  commended  is  the  discussion  of  the  racial  effects.  As  a 
trustworthy  general  guide  it  should  prove  a  god-send." — Ne-w  York 
Evening  Post. 

The  Election  of  Senators 

By  Professor  George  H.  Haynes,  Author  of  "  Representation 
in  State  Legislatures."     300  pp.    $1.50  net;  by  mail,  $1.65. 

Shows   the   historical  reasons   for  the   present  method,  and 

its  effect  on  the  Senate  and  Senators,  and  on  state  and  local 

government,  with  a  detailed  review  of  the  arguments  for  and 

against  direct  election. 

"A  timely  book.  .  .  .  Prof.  Haynes  is  qualified  for  a  historical  and 
analytical  treatise  on  the  subject  of  the  Senate."—  Ne-w  York  Evening  Sun 


HENRY     HOLT     AND     COMPANY 

i*  WEST  33d  STREET  NEW  YORK 


STANDARD  BOOKS  IN  ECONOMICS 

BUCHER'S   INDUSTRIAL  EVOLUTION 

Translated  by  Dr.  S.  M.  Wickett,  Lecturer  in  Toronto  Univer- 
sity.    393  pp.     8vo.     $2.50. 

The  Outlook  :— A  work  of  prime  importance  to  economic  Btudents.  While 
German  in  the  thoroughness  of  its  scholarship,  it  is  almost  Gallic  in  its  style, 
and  is,  for  the  most  part,  decidedly  interesting  reading. 

CLARK:    THE    LABOR    MOVEMENT   IN    AUSTRALASIA 

By  Victor  S.  Clark.     327  pp.     12mo.     $1.50  net. 

Quarterly  Journal  of  Economics :— A  valuable  work  based  upon  investi- 
gation in  the  field.  Treats  judicially  the  various  aspects  of  the  Australian  labor 
movement  and  estimates  critically  its  significance. 

HOLLANDER  AND   BARNETT:  STUDIES   IN  AMERICAN 
TRADE  UNIONISM 

Edited  by  J.  H.  Hollander  and  G.  E.  Barnett,  Professors 
In  Johns  Hopkins  University.     380  pp.     8vo.     $2.75  net. 

Twelve  papers  by  graduate  students  and  officers  of  Johns 
Hopkins  University,  the  results  of  original  investigations. 

McPHERSON :  THE  WORKING  OF  THE  RAILROADS 

By  Logan  G.  McPherson.     273  pp.     12mo.     $1.50  net. 
Simply  and  lucidly  tells  what  a  railroad  company  is,  what  it 
does,  and  how  it  does  it. 

MORE'S    WAGE-EARNERS'    BUDGETS 

A  Study  of  Standards  and  Cost  of  Living  in  New  York  City. 
By  Louise  B.  More.  With  a  preface  by  Professor  F.  H.  Gid- 
dings.     280  pp.     8vo.     $2.50  net. 

A  report  of  the  first  investigation  carried  on  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  Committee  on  Social  Investigations  at  Greenwich 
House,  a  social  settlement  on  the  lower  West  Side  of  New  York 
City,  among  workingmen's  families  of  different  races  and  occu- 
pations. 

ZARTMAN:   THE   INVESTMENTS    OF   LIFE  INSURANCE 
COMPANIES 

By  Lester  W.  Zartman,  Instructor  in  Yale  University. 
259  pp.     12mo.     $1.25  net. 

It  analyzes  investments  and  the  earning  power  of  the  various 
assets  of  life  insurance  companies.  The  interest  rate  is  calculated 
by  a  new  and  exact  method.  The  author  also  discusses  the  rela- 
tions of  the  investments  to  social  welfare,  and  the  proper  control 
of  the  immense  assets  of  the  companies. 

HENRY    HOLT    AND     COMPANY 

34  West  33d   Street  New  York 


TEXT-BOOKS  IN  ECONOMICS 

ADAMS'S  SCIENCE  OF  FINANCE 

By  Henry  C.  Adams,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Michigan, 
573  pp.     8vo.     (American  Science  Series.)     $3.00. 

Edwin  R.  A.  Seligman,  Columbia  University,  in  "Political  Science  Quar- 
terly " :— W/Jl  at  once  command  attention  as  a  lasting  contribution  to  eco- 
nomic literature.  ...  It  is  perhaps  no  exaggeration  to  say  that  Professor 
Adams  is  at  the  head  of  those  American  scholars  who  have  grasped  the  essen- 
tial spirit  of  modern  industrial  life  ;  and  it  is  likewise  no  exaggeration  to  claim 
for  this  volume  the  distinction  of  being  one  of  the  most  original,  the  most  sug- 
gestive, and  most  brilliant  productions  that  have  made  their  appearance  in 
recent  decades. 

DANIELS'S   ELEMENTS  OF  PUBLIC  FINANCE 

By  Winthrop  More  Daniels,  Professor  of  Political  Econ- 
omy in  Princeton  University.     373  pp.     12mo.     $1.50. 

£.  Spenoer  Baldwin,  Professor  in  Boston  University :— It  is  a  piece  of 
work  well  done  both  from  a  scientific  and  a  literary  point  of  view— a  text-book 
with  a  style.  .  .  .  The  lucid  explanation  of  the  financial  system  of  the 
United  States  makes  the  book  particularly  valuable  for  the  American  student. 

SCOTT'S  MONEY   AND  BANKING 

By  W.  A.  Scott,  Professor  in  the  University  of  Wisconsin. 
Revised.     377  pp.    8vo.     $2.00. 

H.  E.  Mills,  Professor  in  Vassar  College :— It  is  clear,  comprehensive,  and 
conservative.  All  in  all,  it  seems  to  me  the  best  single  book  to  use  in  con- 
nection with  a  course  on  Money  and  Banking. 

SEAGER'S   PRINCIPLES  OF  ECONOMICS 

By  Henry  R.  Seager,  Professor  in  Columbia  University. 
Fourth  Edition  of  Introduction  to  Economics.  Revised  and  En- 
larged.    642  pp.     8vo.     $2.25. 

David  Kinley,  University  of  Illinois:— It  shows  improvement  with  every 
edition  and  it  always  was  a  first-class  book. 

SEAGER'S  ECONOMICS,    BRIEFER  COURSE 

By  Henry  R.  Seager,  Professor  in  Columbia  University. 
467  pp.     Large  12mo.     $1.75. 

Intended  primarily  for  those  who  wish  to  give  only  that  amount 
of  attention  to  economic  theory  that  is  essential  to  the  intelli- 
gent discussion  of  practical  economic  problems. 


HENRY    HOLT    AND     COMPANY 

34  West  33d  Street  New  York 


LEADING  AMERICANS 

Edited  by  W.  P.  Trent,  and  generally  confined  to  those  no 

longer  living.     Large  i2mo.     With  portraits. 

Each  $1-75,  by  mail  $1.90. 

R.  M.  JOHNSTON'S  LEADING  AMERICAN  SOLDIERS 

By  the  Author  of  "  Napoleon,"  etc. 
Washington,  Greene,  Taylor,  Scott,  Andrew  Jackson,  Grant, 
Sherman,    Sheridan,    McClellan,    Meade,    Lee,    "Stonewall" 
Jackson,  Joseph  E.  Johnston. 

"  Very  interesting  .  .  .  much  sound  originality  of  treatment,  and  the 
style   is   very  clear." — Springfield  Republican. 

JOHN  ERSKINE'S   LEADING  AMERICAN  NOVELISTS 

Charles  Brockden  Brown,  Cooper,  Simms,  Hawthorne, 
Mrs.  Stowe,  and  Bret  Harte. 

"  He  makes  his  study  of  these  novelists  all  the  more  striking  because 
of  their  contrasts  of  style  and  their  varied  purpose.  .  .  .  Well  worth 
any  amount  of  time  we  may  care  to  spend  upon  them." — Boston  Tran- 
script. 

W.  M.  PAYNE'S   LEADING  AMERICAN  ESSAYISTS 

A  General  Introduction  dealing  with  essay  writing  in  Amer- 
ica, and  biographies  of  Irving,  Emerson,  Thoreau,  and  George 
William  Curtis. 

"  It  is  necessary  to  know  only  the  name  of  the  author  of  this  work 
to  be  assured   of  its  literary  excellence." — Literary  Digest. 

LEADING   AMERICAN   MEN   OF   SCIENCE 

Edited  by  President  David  Starr  Jordan. 

Count  Rumford  and  Josiah  Willard  Gibbs,  by  E.  E.  Slosson; 
Alexander  Wilson  and  Audubon,  by  Witmer  Stone;  Silliman,  by 
Daniel  C.  Gilman;  Joseph  Henry,  by  Simon  Newcomb;  Louis  Agassiz 
and  Spencer  Fullerton  Baird,  by  Charles  F.  Holder;  Jeffries  Wyman, 
by  B.  G.  Wilder;  Asa  Gray,  by  John  M.  Coulter;  James  Dwight  Dana, 
by  William  North  Rice;  Marsh,  by  Geo.  Bird  Grinnell;  Edward 
Drinker  Cope,  by  Marcus  Benjamin;  Simon  Newcomb,  by  Marcus 
Benjamin;  George  Brown  Goode,  by  D.  S.  Jordan;  Henry  Augustus 
Rowland,  by   Ira   Remsen;  William   Keith   Brooks,  by  E.  A.  Andrews. 

GEORGE  ILES'S  LEADING   AMERICAN   INVENTORS 

By  the  author  of  "  Inventors  at  Work,"  etc.  Colonel  John  Stevens 
(screw-propeller,  etc.);  his  son,  Rorf.rt  (T-rail,  etc.);  Fulton;  Erics- 
son; Whitney;  Blanciiard  (lathe);  McCormick;  Howe;  Goodyear; 
Morse;  Tilghman  (paper  from  wood  and  sand  blast);  Sholes  (type, 
writer);    and   Mergenthaler    (linotype). 

Other  Volumes  covering  Lawyers,  Poets,  Statesmen, 
Editors, Explorers, etc., arranged  for.    Leaflet  on  application. 

HENRY     HOLT    AND     COMPANY 

PUBLISHERS  (ix',2)  NEW  YORK 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


JUN22«83 


THE  LTBRART 

tJNIVERS  TY  OJ  C  ^LTORNLl 

LOS  ANGELES 


J 


f 


3  1158  00318  5203 


This  book  is  DUE  on 


the  last  date  stamped  below. 


ID 
URL 


RENEWAL 
LD  URL 


w  REC'D  LD-UJWi 
m     WAR  22  U 

MAR  12 1970 

REOT  LO-URU 


MAR  2  3 1973 


SSC'D  LD-Ui 


D  LD-URL 

*Vr  2  0  1973 


v« 


Form  L9-Series  444 


REC'D  ID-Uffl 

JAN  12  V 

Dec  is  1975 


;APR  y2  1977 


WSC  ^ 


D 


6  EUR  I 


MAR  1  7  1979 


RECDk? 


II  in  2  51979 


THE  LIBRARY 

UNIVERS  r'T  0?  C  kLFORNLt 

LOS  ANGELES 


3  1158  00318  5203 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 

Los  Angeles 
This  book  is  DUE  on  the  last  date  stamped  below. 


*v 


■RTOCP^WJ 


10 


RENE 
LDU 


Form  L9-Seruw  *« 


315 


THE  LIBRARY 

tJNIVERS..T5r  O?  C  kL.FORNU 
LOS  ANGELES 


r 


3  1158  00318  5203 


